| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, there's plenty of room for different forms of devotion, depending on the god you choose. Chaotic gods, for example, will rarely ask for strict obedience. But that has to do with the gods you like.
Also, even if Roidira isn't released, I think no one in PFS would object if you play one of her clerics, choosing another deity for the mecanical aspects.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Quick context, my personal childhood experience with religion was... not positive.
No further detail needed, I suspect. But I've been thinking about trying to roleplay a cleric.
However any time I consider doing so, the idea of what a cleric is quickly shows up as a subservient, self debasing bootlicker in my head.
The Divine essay in Secrets of Magic... does not help.
** spoiler omitted **...
Some points need to be taken into consideration.
In short, the traditional archetype of the cleric is of a submissive devotee to a deity. But you don't have to stick to that. As long as you have a good background and do not seek to directly violate the anathemas of your deity, you can still, for some reason unknown to everyone but the deity, be blessed by the deity. Which can even make the character very interesting and open up many opportunities to tell interesting stories depending on the GM. But if you are still not satisfied, then choose another class. I don't mean to be offensive by this, but if the cleric doesn't appeal to you, there are plenty of alternative options.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
While submission is an aspect of religion, Golarion has some deities, as SuperBidi mentioned that despise submission as a concept. I'd start with the Freedom Domain for example, or Knowledge if one wants to emphasize thinking over unthinking, Confidence if stressing agency, and so forth. Your Cleric wouldn't have to take those Domains, but some of the deities with those Domains might have the desired traits.
Or, since we're talking about dozens of deities, a player could choose a deity whose Edicts & Anathema line up exactly with the PC's personality you wish to play. The PC was literally made for that religion. Hard to say one's submitting & unthinking when one already was like that and thinking that way. It can be an internal calling rather than an externally imposed self-destruction. Parents & friends knew all along so-and-so would pursue that religion because they were already living it out.
In the same vein, the Edicts & Anathema might be aspirational. While the PC might not sync well with them, they might match the PC's self-improvement goals, i.e. Irori. The parts the Cleric needs to conform would be parts they're aiming to alter anyway. Think of celebrities who've gone on spiritual retreats to improve themselves or even those who embrace cults like Scientology. Except in your Cleric's case, the retreat's ongoing and the benefits are tangible. (And their religion might be personal enough one doesn't need to evangelize, rather try to live as a beacon others learn from.)
And when thinking of the religion's structure, as an adventurer I doubt the PC will be beholden to any superiors in actual play. On the grimmer edge, the deity might be one that encourages making one's own authority structure (a.k.a. cult), where your PC isn't the one submitting & changing their thinking so much as enforcing it among followers. Their relationship with their deity might be more transactional, like bargaining for power. I'll do X ONLY because you grant me magic, and that exchange suits me. (Though no, I wouldn't recommend this interpretation for you, StarDragonJenn, but maybe for others reading this who lack toxic experiences with real-world religion.)
That said, the majority of my experiences with Cleric players involves token gestures toward their deity's existence and desires, or a PC that is more like a mini-version of said deity. No debasement or other real-world toxicity, at least not at the table. And given the gregarious nature of some deities, i.e. Cayden and Shelyn stand out here, roleplaying their follower encourages friendly, pro-social choices at the table, even if a bit drunk or artsy.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm somebody who's not particularly good at playing Clerics, but it means I've given it some thought.
In general, it's nice to have some reason why a deity picked the character. There are a lot of people in the setting, and most of them would be happy to have magic. Now, one of those possible reasons is "they're a subservient, self-debasing boot-licker", but that's far from the only one.
I'll also just comment on Nethys a bit. Nearly every single god lists off three areas of concern, covering different aspects of what they care about and focus on. Nethys just has one: magic. The only other gods that focused on one thing are the four riders of the apocalypse. By the standards of the other gods, Nethys is obsessed. So a follower of his having that view is probably less a "god" thing, and more a "Nethys" thing. Lost Omens: Divine Mysteries would probably be a more helpful read than Secrets of Magic, if you're interested!)
A few options that stand out:
- Shelyn might offer to make a particularly unique artist her Cleric. Because "What is art?" is such a significant question for people even without divinity in the mix, it makes her a good fit for a Cleric exploring the boundaries what their deity cares about. She's also a deity who is going to be fine with a follower who cares more about art than her, so long as they're compassionate towards fellow people.
- Cayden Cailean isn't entirely clear on the details of how he became a god, and probably has some degree of imposter syndrome even as a god. It might be helpful to play a somewhat questioning follower of a somewhat questioning god.
- Over on the formerly lawful side, Abadar is a god of trade and civilization. Somebody who cares about stopping corruption could see Abadar as a powerful ally on the same side rather than a stompy master. You could also have a second or third child of some noble, expected to eventually take a leadership position. They're out adventuring to try and learn about governance elsewhere in the world because they take those duties seriously, and view Abadar as a good example and hope he'll help them not mess up.
- There are also a few gods that promote hedonism in some form- Calistria and Urgathoa in particular, and Arshea with more of a focus on freedom. It's a lot easier to make a Cleric that isn't self-debasing when their deity has a lot of focus on one's self.
- For a friend and confidant, Desna is an excellent traveling companion. Travel as her focus, the stars at night for direction, and good fortune on the road. A good Desnan Cleric is probably somebody interested in being the stroke of good luck that other people need.
- As far as seeking out tests of faith, Irori feels like a good fit. He cares about seeking out self-perfection, which by its nature involves trying to define what self-perfection is for oneself. Being a Cleric of Irori might even be something the character sees as a stepping stone or aid to get started.
For a more general take, most deities have something that they care about more than themselves. A character who is interested in that is a good starting point for a Cleric that isn't subsuming themselves in their deity.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It depends on the deity and your reason for worshipping them.
A farmer worshipping Erastil may focus on praying to Erastil for a good harvest and focusing on Erastil's teaching for managing the land, not all his dogma.
You could also have a worshipper that followed a deity for power. If that power is not provided, then they don't stay worshipping them.
The old school polytheistic worshippers were not always subservient followers, but worshipping for a reason. A follower of a Aries/Mars may be a martial follower who expects to win wars. He expects Aries/Mars to provide support in that goal. So they learn the prayers and follow for victory.
I don't think in a polytheistic world where deities clearly have power and exchange that power for service and worship you have to play a perfectly subservient follower. You could well be a follower exchanging worship and deeds for power with the expectations of receiving said power.
I would think about why your cleric follows a particularly deity and how that deity aligns with their goals and beliefs. This is a polytheistic world where deities have power over certain areas, not a general single deity with power over all. So clerics follow to gain a portion of power in the area the deity controls and exchanges worship and deeds for that power.
I wouldn't be too trapped in the modern world's conception of religion based on monotheism, but base the cleric's motivations on a polytheistic world where worshipping a particular deity is as much about the personal goals of the cleric and the power they desire as it is about the deity desiring worship. Many deities don't care about how you conduct your personal moral code outside of the area they control and what they want as acts of worship in exchange for power.
So you have a wide latitude in shaping a clerics goals. Many deities could care less about expanding worship or ensuring compliance with some religion. They want the cleric to do what they require in exchange for power and could care less if the cleric finds more followers.
So when reading about a deity and designing a cleric, you have to think about how that all ties together with polytheism with deities controlling powerful forces that you call upon for your own goals.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For irony, my response has been delayed due to me attending Sunday worship service this morning. Though I attended church via Zoom rather than in person, because I was in too poor shape to drive this morning. For coincidence, the gospel lesson today was the Prodigal Son, Luke 15:11-32, about a wayward son returning home, where home represents faith.
I have a history of mixing roleplaying games and church. For example, I have twice recruited new players from my church and I once played the Pathfinder 1st Edition Beginner Box in my Sunday School class, Beginner Box in Sunday School. But what StarDragonJenn's post brings to mind was back when I played a cleric of Pelor in a Dungeons & Dragons game that my wife run during a Wednesday night game group at our church. Pelor god of Sun, Light, Strength, and Healing, has a generic Christian-like doctrine, so I could model my cleric after pastors I knew. The cleric, whose name I have forgotten, often gave fatherly advice by quoting from a fictional book called "Travels with Pelor" that I was making up line by line.
That cleric was seeing further enlightenment by studying a book written by a saint on a pilgrimage. My personal belief is that blind faith is weak faith. Faith is strengthened by study and by confronting truths that might seem contrary to the faith. The old saying, "The exception proves the rule," has been interpreted in many ways (see Wikipedia), but I follow the interpretation that "proves" is from the Latin word "probare" meaning to test or inspect, the same root as the English "probe." The exception forces us to inspect the rule, and thus, better understand the rule.
The behavior of the gods of Golarion is an exception to how the real-world Christian god behaves. The Golarion gods are designed for adventure, to squabble and oppose each other, even if they had the same alignment in the Good versus Evil and Law versus Chaos chart. They have as many lost temples in the jungle or desert as they have active temples. Their clerics are designed to be playable characters, handy NPCs who heal party members for cash, or evil adversaries. Few of them specialize in the skills needed by pastors to lead a congregation. (We Lutherans call our preachers "pastor" which means shepherd, because they are supposed to tend a flock of worshipers. The symbolism is that we need guidance to stick together, not that we are sheep. Nevertheless, Jesus did tell several sheep and shepherd parables.)
Pathfinder 2nd Edition's edicts and anathema system is more interesting than the D&D alignments. It gives the cleric characters definite goals. For example, Desna, the friendly goddess of night and one of my favorite fictional gods, has Edicts aid fellow travelers, explore new places, express yourself through art and song, find what life has to offer; and Anathema foster despair or terror in the innocent, cast nightmare or use similar magic to corrupt dreams, engage in bigoted behavior. My second Pathfinder character (in Rise of the Runelords back when 1st Edition was new) was the gnome ranger Abu Gorgani, named after an ancient Persian astronomer because he was a follower of Desna. He was from the reclusive gnome community in Sanos Forest in Varisia, but he was following Desna's edict to go out and see the world. Obedience to Desna's edicts should result in self-improvement, and though I created Abu as a happy-go-lucky carefree little guy, he became the party leader due to his practical attitude and willingness to learn from experience. I ended up altering his alignment from Chaotic Good to Lawful Good due to his friendship with NPC Sheriff Hemlock, but he still worshiped Chaotic Good Desna.
Closer to the present, after I became a forever GM, my elder daughter created a goblin champion Tikti of Grandmother Spider, weaver god of the Anadi. This was calculated design, because she wanted a Chaotic Good god for Liberator Cause who also favored Crafting. Nevertheless, Trickery is also in Grandmother Spider's domains and "skilled and clever, think for yourself" are in her edicts, so Tikti was a clever and tricky champion, very different from the old straight-laced D&D paladins. I describe an example at How does a Liberator Champion Deal with Slavers? comment #45.
Later, in that same Ironfang Invasion campaign, the party rescued the goddess Gendowyn, Lady of Fangwood from captivity of 700 years. Gendowyn is such a minor god, a long-lived fey glaistig who became a god after millennia of nuturing a forest and its inhabitants, that she still had a physical body that could be imprisoned by an agent of Cyth V'sug. That campaign actually altered Gendowyn's edict "destroy blighted fey and agents of Cyth V'sug," which represents her ire at her captivity, to "protect the forest from corruption especially by agents of Cyth V'sug," because my PCs were more merciful and were redeeming blighted fey. The module, Prisoners of the Blight, had the party rescue her on the 2nd to last page and then depart for the next module, but I rewrote it to give them more time together.
But my players accomplished more than causing an existing god to change. Let me quote How Can I Remove Slavery From Ironfang Invasion, comment #59:
Ending Slavery
The truce negotiations after the assault on Longshaodw had failed over slavery. The hobgoblins would not give up due to their cultural adherence to Hadregash, barghest hero-god of dominion and slavery. Then the adventure path sent the party away from the Ironfang Invasion in the next two modules, Siege of Stone and Prisoners of the Blight. Slavery and captivity did come up with other people, such as the duergar of the Darklands. When the party resumed fighting the Ironfang Legion in the homebrew journey to Larb Village, the homebrew battle at Emberville, and at the Onxy Citadel, the hobgoblin slaveholding-culture was not immediately relevant. It really mattered only during treaty negotiations. However, I had to make sure the end-of-game treaty negotiations would not stall over this issue, because otherwise the war would not end.I resolved the hobgoblin adherence to Hadregash in a classical fantasy style. The party killed Hadregash.
How can mortals kill a god in Pathfinder? (Ren'zar-jo's player linked to the video DargothWave to express this sentiment.) Well, the party contained a god of their own. Many levels ago, when gods such as Gendowyn became involved in the campaign, the leshy PC Twining Gold-Flame Honeysuckle expressed a dream of becoming the god of familiars. Her backstory is that she had started as a familiar. Thus, I created a Godhood Archetype for her. ...
I enabled one of my players becoming a minor god like Gendowyn (I had to homebrew because War of Immortals was not yet written) in order to alter hobgoblin culture by defeating their god.
The gods of Golarion sometimes represent culture rather than divine power. This happens in the real world, too, and we Christians have to realize that our understanding of God is strongly influenced by our worldly culture. My left-wing church is very different from the right-wing Christian nationalists, and God is neither left-wing, right-wing, nor any political alignment.
Some later PCs worshiped Honey, so I wrote up her entry as a deity, The Fangwood Pantheon. She is popular among leshies in my campaign world.
The fictional gods of Golarion let players explore the nature of gods and religion. And such exploration can improve understanding and faith about the real God in the real world. Paizo designers believe in variety among PCs, so Pathfinder clerics can be played in many different ways: obedient, free-willed, mean, nice, proud, or humble. Go for it.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Deities have anathemas, if you break them you may lose spellcasting or other divine powers. That does not mean you are a servant without your own agency, and i am sure there are a lot of clerics that rate their own comforts a lot higher than executing the perceived will of a god or godess.
As an atheist i enjoy playing a devout follower of a god:ess or a pantheon from time to time, but i don't see edicts and anathemas as really limiting - you decide what you want to play, after all.
There have been quite some tries at variant rules of clerics that don't follow deities directly in previous editions, if you feel strongly about it you can probably talk to your DM about something like that (or play an oracle).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It depends A LOT on the deity.
For example, Arazni is a deity who HATES submission (I recommend you read about her at the link). Because of everything she went through in life, resurrection and unlife, the mere fact of depending, submitting and following blindly is contrary to everything she is. The basis of her belief is those who fight on their own for their own freedom and life, her granting of power works much more as a way to help these people who look to her for power to save themselves than any kind of submission to her will. And she is not the only one, several deities (formerly considered chaotic) fall into this profile. You can't call this a bug, because when you have entire deities that operate this way, it is no longer an exception. In fact, if you read Lost Omens: Divine Mysteries you will probably notice that the more orderly deities who ask for or expect "blind" devotion are just one part of a huge range of hundreds of different deities who share their powers out of self-interest or simply because they want to help those who seek something they also value.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I dislike that divine magic essay for two reasons:
1. It feels more for an NPC, as the main draw of playing an RPG is to have agency, both over the PC and through that PC over the narrative. There shouldn't be a class or magic style that requires deferring to another's agency. Even Edicts & Anathema are loose guidelines. And such loss of self is not even a norm of the genre (either fantasy or RPG) for protagonist divine agents. If anything they find themselves and their own agency (though yes, often flavored as giving it up in order to do so, which feels more like an epiphany re: their fulfillment more than groveling).
2. It also feels limited by a narrow category of real-world religions*, namely those that require finding one's identity/power/etc. through submission and worship.** There are many holy traditions that do not require that (or manifest devotion in different practices), yet provide those same benefits. If one were to become an unthinking devotee of the Buddha for example, then one would have failed as a Buddhist. Buddhism encourages the Buddhist to find their own path, their own balance, not mirror Buddha's.
*This isn't necessarily Paizo's fault, as Religious Studies itself has roots seeded by scholars focused on the Abrahamic traditions who then shoehorned a useful structure for those atop religions & philosophies with much different systems, as if there were corollaries for each aspect. There aren't.
** And even that can't be applied to the whole of any religion and their paths to spiritual leadership, given the variance in denominations and traditions (plus the mystic traditions within).
Which is to say, the essay needs work. And I think Paizo would agree at most it's a guideline, not a doctrine, and best set aside if it interferes with how one wishes to approach the game, or in this case divine classes.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
For me (a life long athiest) the trick is to play a character who would follow the Edicts and Anathema even if they were NOT a cleric or even if the God didn't exist.
So, for example, a character who basically really, really, really loves art could be a cleric of Shelyn almost as an afterthought. They don't follow her rules because they follow Shelyn, they follow Shelyn because they totally agree with her on what living a good life means.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We don't have faith in a setting like Pathfinder.
I'm not sure what's there even qualifies as religion.
If you 'worship' your neighbor because he has a big gun - that isn't faith. He's standing in the yard with a big gun. It's just fact.
If you form a doctrine for how to venerate the neighbor with the big gun, and what to give him to keep him from shooting up your yard and instead shooting your other neighbor's yard - that's not a religion, that's paying off a mob's as a part of a protection racket.
Faith systems are about believing something about the unknowable. Religions are about organizing that into social / political systems for various reasons / goals.
What you have in Golarian is a team of super heroes and a team of super villains and regular people pick sides and try to pay them off for protection, and some of those regular people get minor super powers as a result.
It's a fundamental flaw of many tRPG settings - they were written by people who didn't understand polytheism, let alone even faith.
I would be very hesitant to try and apply an lessons for your real life from it. It's a game mechanic system that, at a fundamental level, just doesn't work for actual human psychology, faith, and religion.
Best to just hand wave away the 'sense of disbelief' on it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I'm kind of in that camp as well. In any gamified situation involving a religion that grants abilities, it is going to be inherently transactional and I don't think that's a healthy place to build an understanding of faith from. Stick to these edicts, perform these actions for spells, gain new spells at specific levels. All very transactional.
As pretty much a lifelong agnostic, a not inconsiderable amount of my understanding of faith has been from looking at how it has been handled in TTRPGs and going 'Nope, definitely not that'.
I would say that if you are looking for a good roleplay experience of faith, steer clear of any class that actually gets spells or other class features from the divine to remove as much of the transactional nature of TTRPG faith as possible. I would even go so far as to say your character should put their faith in a concept first and maybe align to a deity that most suits them from there. Treat the deities as someone might the head of a powerful RL religious organization. Hopefully that reaches what you are looking for.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the responses everyone. I mean it.
Deities have anathemas, if you break them you may lose spellcasting or other divine powers. That does not mean you are a servant without your own agency, and i am sure there are a lot of clerics that rate their own comforts a lot higher than executing the perceived will of a god or godess.Sure, but is a cleric having their own agency typically seen as a bug, as the divine magic essay implies, or are there canon clerics that would scoff at that essay? I think that's the bedrock of what I'm trying to ask.
Oh yeah, absolutely. Even some Asmodeans would scoff at it, and say that they would be would be worthless to their god without personal ambition. A deity like Shelyn would be horrified by any follower trying to erase their self on her behalf.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We don't have faith in a setting like Pathfinder.
...
Faith systems are about believing something about the unknowable. Religions are about organizing that into social / political systems for various reasons / goals.
Interesting point of view. Most gods in Golarion are blatantly obvious--a few gods such as Norgorber are elusive--so people do not need faith to believe that gods exist. The gods are knowable and known.
However, my religious view is that faith is about trusting a god. A Golarion character who resembles me is not going to worship Rovagug or Cyth-V’sug, no matter how much they prove their existance. They want to destroy or decay the world, so they cannot be trusted to care about people.
Scientific healer Kassi Aviril is an interesting case of not trusting gods.
Sometimes called the Mother of Medicine, Kassi Aziril’s stubborn insistence on relying on science and alchemy over the use of magical care for the sick and injured led her to a bevy of major discoveries that had been, until recently, ignored by the medical community, due to the much more available access to divine healing throughout most of the world. Yet in Rahadoum, where faith in the gods is persecuted, techniques like those pioneered by Kassi are literal lifesavers.
Kassi Aviril invents non-divine healing methods partly for the biological science and partly because she distrusts reliance on the gods. The gods are not people, so their motives in providing healing magic are not necessarily the best for people. Some religious people view her as blasphemous and have tried to kill her, so she moved to Rahadoum, a nation that outlawed religions after being devastated in the religious Oath War.
I plan to introduce Kassi Aviril as a visiting scholar at the Magaambya Academy in my Strength of Thousands campaign. The party will have to stop an assassination attempt on her, but I hope the philosophical discussions with her will be interesting, too.
That Strength of Thousands campaign also has a form of faith. The PCs are students at the Magaambya School of Magic and they have faith that the school protects them. The school regularly sends them out on service projects, some of which involve combat. The PCs believe that the school won't deliberately send them into deadly combat. The party has been in deadly Severe-Threat combat, but that was due to the teachers grossly misjudging a situation from incomplete information or outright deception (they apologized for their misjudgment afterwards), or due to the party jumping in to help against an unexpected deadly opponent without Magaambyan oversight. Other GMs (see discussion at Common Sense Versus The Plot, comment #17) have played Strength of Thousands brutally, but I prefer a more civilized school that tries to protect its students.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Going back to the title of the thread, I don't think there is a way to understand faith through a roleplaying game. There's a quip to the effect that studying many religions is understanding none; with one interpretation that to know requires devotion (or ignorance of competing religions if being cynical). Which is to say RPing won't resemble that much while juggling stats, fighting monsters, and generally goofing around. Even the utmost immersion into Golarion's faux religions with no actual depth, history, or culture isn't going to reflect how faith operates in the human mind.
Heck, I was listening to a podcast/radio show where one of my favorite philosophers was going to debate a veteran apologist. The first order of business was to define faith before launching into the main topic. I looked forward to getting a definition of faith suitable for such discussions...and never got it. They spent 3/4 the time arguing over the definition (mostly because they both knew how foundational their own particular definition would be to later premises). And then the host had to move them along to the advertised topic (which I can't recall). So yeah, understanding faith gets into contentious territory. I'd say the two radio guests were describing the same phenomenon, except had such divided opinions on its value that it altered their interpretations of it.
Is faith a god-given blessing of insight or a mind virus? How load-bearing can/should faith be in determining truth? And how personal/subjective/objective is that truth/path/insight? Many who are pro-faith equate faith with trust (and many have insisted I must too). Many who are anti-faith equate it with circular reasoning, faith based on one's faith is like saying trust is warranted by the trust itself. And that's still only surface level as emotions, sensations, logic, and epistemology broaden the use/abuse of the word.
So yeah, delving directly into how faith operates on Earth leads into a hedge maze with umpteen guides with different agendas, some to lead you out of having/using faith, others to tangle you in its darkest deadends, and others to show you the pretty paths. This vagueness also makes faith difficult to reclaim, or determine which if any aspects of it are worth the bother (if not toxic).
Anyway, Cleric's a powerful class desired by most parties, your PC doesn't need to lose themself, and there's minimal to be learned about having faith by RPing even the most devout character. IMO it'd even be misleading as it's safe and from an objective POV rather than one that has to navigate with a limited perspective.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sure, but is a cleric having their own agency typically seen as a bug, as the divine magic essay implies, or are there canon clerics that would scoff at that essay? I think that's the bedrock of what I'm trying to ask.
I personally make a big difference between the "line" cleric forming the clergy of the religion and the PC cleric. PC clerics are definitely "bugs". I can see a million reasons for a deity to choose a PC cleric and close their eye(s) regularly on their actions.
First, PC clerics will certainly impact the world in a way no one else will and as such having them following you means you will impact the world greatly. Second, PC clerics have great chances to become heroes, spreading the faith like no one else. Third, I can see deities with similar portfolios fighting over PC clerics to get them in their rank and as such a deity can choose to give powers to a PC not because they perfectly embody their faith but because they don't want the other one to get a hero in their ranks.
That's why, in my opinion, the relationship between a PC and their deity can range accross the whole spectrum of relationships, even getting to the point where the deity can be seen as subservient to the cleric. I don't see it as an intrinsic reason to block good stories.
PCs are above the norm, they are meant to be heroes. And in the great god game of ruling the universe they are the best tools at a god's disposal.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
First, I think you have a limited concept of faith, likely because of the experience you had with it previously. (I'm assuming monotheistic). A common mistake we have coming from that perspective is, no, followers of a specific god and a factually polytheistic world do not, and do not need to, believe in the infallibility and perfection of a god.
It might be easier to think of the relationship between Cleric and God as a parasocial one. If you have a streamer or celebrity you really look up to. You wish to show your support for the work they do and the good they do and the joy and comfort they bring you through purchasing their merch, watching their work, listening to their songs. You recognize they are just a person, but you believe in them.
Also, if your characters tend to have the same fraught relationship with the divine you did, consider a cleric of Arazni. She experienced this betrayal and abuse in reverse. She was abandoned by her god, her followers summoned and bound her to fight against her will, she died in that fight, and was raised as an unwilling lich queen, where she was bound for centuries. Now, she is free, returned to "life". and is the patron goddess of the abused, and the resilient. She is the Unyielding. and her followers living with dignity, by any means necessary.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hope I can sort of piggyback off this conversation: would it be possible to play a divine inquisitor? Not in the sense of "our" inquisitors, which sought out heretics, but someone who literally questions the power and scope of the deities? Coud a Cleric (or maybe a Champion) be critical of their own faith, of their own deity, and still be a proper follower of that faith? Or would it be better to drape that flavour over a non-divine class, such as maybe a Wizard who uses their intellect?
Reason is, I got inspired by a fictional character who uses their intellect to solve mysteries, even within his own church. And I'm just wondering if it's possible for a Cleric to be skeptical of, or question the power, scope, and limits of their deity, or if that's grounds for expulsion from the church. I want to believe indeed in critical thinking rather than blind faith, but which deity (if any) would fit best with that?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hope I can sort of piggyback off this conversation: would it be possible to play a divine inquisitor? Not in the sense of "our" inquisitors, which sought out heretics, but someone who literally questions the power and scope of the deities? Coud a Cleric (or maybe a Champion) be critical of their own faith, of their own deity, and still be a proper follower of that faith? Or would it be better to drape that flavour over a non-divine class, such as maybe a Wizard who uses their intellect?
Reason is, I got inspired by a fictional character who uses their intellect to solve mysteries, even within his own church. And I'm just wondering if it's possible for a Cleric to be skeptical of, or question the power, scope, and limits of their deity, or if that's grounds for expulsion from the church. I want to believe indeed in critical thinking rather than blind faith, but which deity (if any) would fit best with that?
That's roughly the plot of Sky King's Tomb and as such I'd say that it's more than possible, it's very much accepted.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Going back to the title of the thread, I don't think there is a way to understand faith through a roleplaying game.Maybe that wasn't well worded...
But also maybe this was a mistake and kind of silly...
Thank you, everyone.
Maybe? But it wasn't until my third response that I interpreted it as looking at real-life faith so maybe it was worded fine if you were only looking at faith re: acting the part. (No method acting required BTW.)
And it feels like neither a mistake nor silly. We're discussing published material that's interfering with play for those with a common enough lived experience that there are scores of YouTube channels tackling it.* There are going to be other players with this issue who've perhaps felt too shy to address it or have avoided playing divine classes for similar reasons. I've known some. You're not alone.
And Paizo seeks this kind of input. They've created a trauma survivor risen to goddess and a powerful country defined by its struggle with the aftereffects of religious strife. This thread involves both, so you haven't gone astray with this.
Personally I've enjoyed blending two of my favorite interests: RPGs & religious impact. So thank you in return, and you're welcome.
*ETA: The Recovering From Religion Foundation offers support, even a hotline, for those who, well, are recovering from religious experiences. My city (U.S.) has in-person meetings, and they operate in a couple other countries too. Take care.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You could possibly consider grandmother spider as a deity, if you still want to try this.
She's a god, yes. But she was also mistreated by the gods and not compensated for her work as their weaver of fate. She specifically forbids abuses of power, and encourages independent thought.
While not explicitly stated, it would not be hard to assume this applies to her too, making her less of a divine boss, and more of a divine mentor, or guiding figure, who grants divine power not with the expectation of servitude, but with the idea that followers use it to secure theirs and other's indpendence.
If the idea of divine servitude is upsetting for you, but you want to play a cleric, this is one possible angle.
Obviously - I don't know you - so if this wouldn't work for you, that's fine. I just wanted to give my two cents. :)
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hope I can sort of piggyback off this conversation: would it be possible to play a divine inquisitor? Not in the sense of "our" inquisitors, which sought out heretics, but someone who literally questions the power and scope of the deities? Coud a Cleric (or maybe a Champion) be critical of their own faith, of their own deity, and still be a proper follower of that faith? Or would it be better to drape that flavour over a non-divine class, such as maybe a Wizard who uses their intellect?
There is a Pathfinder novel that i recently bought and read, "Death's Heretic", where the protagonist is a rather unwilling executor of Pharasmas will. He hates the church and, hailing from Rahadoum, the divine power per se.
I don't want to overpromise, it is not a philosophical treatise, more a novuelle noir adventure romp (from a very male perspective).
Personally i don't think most inhabitants of Golarion see religion as inherently transactional, but probably because it is just a fact of life.
As was previously said, most deities do not grant power for submission.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The following sums up my view on faith in a deity on Golarion, viewed from the deity's side.
Gorum is the god of glory through conflict and battle.
Like any god, Gorum does not expect you to excel or even succeed at this. But he definitely expects you to do your best reaching for this
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally i don't think most inhabitants of Golarion see religion as inherently transactional, but probably because it is just a fact of life.
As was previously said, most deities do not grant power for submission.
As a GM, I see the gods as story elements, directly meddling in mortal events from behind the scenes or less-directly meddling through the actions of their clerics and champions. A few adventures involve transactional Faustian pacts in which a god grants a mortal minion, usually the villain of the story, great power to serve the god's goal, but in general, they would rather establish temples or secret cults with run-of-the mill clerics in them.
And I have fun playing the personalities of some Golarion gods.
Desna is definitely a behind-the-scenes meddler. She arranges that the right people arrive in the right place in the nick of time, but as a chaotic god, she merely hopes they will do the right thing at that time and place. If not, she makes another plan with other people. She has the patience of a god who is millions of years old.
Brigh, a minor god of technology, was prominent in my Iron Gods campaign which mixed alien high technology with Kellid barbarian culture. She liked to watch people invent new gadgets and taught respect for mechanical life. She would not explain science nor technology to her worshipers, because she wanted to see them make the discoveries on their own.
Casandalee, the android who canonically gained the divine power of the Iron Gods at the end of the Iron Gods adventure path, chose not to become a god in my campaign. She instead chose to return to life as an android. I set her up as a high-level cleric who could tap the divine energies of that could have made her a god. She was a cleric without a god. She and Brigh are friends.
Alseta, goddess of doors and transitions and called The Welcomer, likes to help people transition to a better stage of life. During the Doomsday Dawn playtest of Pathfinder 2nd Edition, my wife played a goblin champion of Alseta. Alseta was nudging the goblins from a primitive species mostly serving as opponents to the heroes to a partially civilized species that could be heroes themselves. (This represented goblins being a secondary playable race from PF1's Advanced Race Guide, to a common playable ancestry in PF2's Pathfinder 2nd Edition Core Rulebook.)
Gendowyn, Lady of Fangwood, is a faerie queen. She cares for the Fangwood Forest and its fey inhabitants and she pays little attention to her divine powers. She views her worshipers inside her forest as subjects under her rule and her worshipers outside her forest as students who could tend forests of their own.
Grandmother Spider is a god who dislikes the hierarchy of gods. She is trying to reform the nature of gods on a shoestring budget of stolen divine power. She brought the Anadi people to Golarion to save them from a disaster on another planet, so she feels responsibility to them and serves as their god to revere, but otherwise she is not interested in worshipers.
Hadregash, the barghest hero-god of domination and slavery, bullies the other barghest hero-gods and is the only god among them who loves order. He wants to be in charge and believes that his might makes right.
Lamashtu, mother of monsters, is a very opinionated and savage goddess with a motherly side. She was an archdemon who fought her way into godhood, and she believes that life is about fighting. It is supposed to be nasty, brutish, and short, red in tooth and claw. She seek to reshape the world that way, removing civilization and mercy. Yet she is generous to her worshipers in her own way, freely giving them powers to become strong and monstrous.
That list of gods is the PF2 gods whose avatars have appeared face-to-face before the player characters in my games. The PCs had also met unofficial gods such as the Death Spider in Rogue Genius Games' The Warren of the Death Spider and homebrew gods Honey and Argwyn. Cayden Cailean, formerly-human god of drinking and adventuring, has been frequently worshiped by PCs in my campaigns, but he never became involved in events.
I had Desna sitting down in a cafe in the plane Elysium casually drinking hot cocoa with the deceased rogue Tierdh while waiting for the party to resurrect him. Brigh and Alseta teamed up to explain what a computer intelligence becoming an Iron God would mean, and asking the party to make the decision to abort or go on. Casandalee was the memories of an extraterrestrial android played as an artificial personality on a handheld device. The party rescued Gendowyn. Grandmother Spider assisted the leshy sorcerer Honey in the first steps toward godhood. Hadregash sought to kill Honey before she became an immortal god. Lamashtu showed up after Hadregash's defeat to strip the title of god of slavery from him, because oppressing others made him weak. She liked Honey, who had a bloodthirsty streak, but knew they would never agree.
Of these gods, only Hadregash seemed focused on submission and obedience. Nor were the gods bargaining to offer power in exchange for service. Instead, they were incarnations of aspects of the campaign story.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think there are two separate issues here.
1) Reclaim/understand faith through roleplay
2) Roleplaying a cleric
These two goals are independent, though obviously there can be overlap in playing a cleric devoted to a deity. To achieve goal #1 you do not need to play a cleric.
For example, if you want to play a sneaky thief, you don’t have to play a rogue—I’ve played one as a sorcerer. My opera singer? Oracle, not bard. And you can reflavor abilities to match your concept—my investigator isn’t a Robert Downey Jr Sherlock Holmes, but rather a seer who sees things a second before they happen. Put the concept first and choose the class that supports it. My devotee of Iomedae was a fighter, not a champion.
If you want both #1 and #2, there are more restrictions—you need to explain why a god would continue to grant spells/powers to your PC—but the same principles apply: choose the deity who fits your concept and reflavor abilities as needed. You wouldn’t pick Asmodeus if your cleric is a rebel questioning her god.
I'm left wondering if there's space for a cleric that thinks like an individual at least a little bit.
Of course there is! Most deities have multiple areas of concern, so there are built-in choices and conflicts right there. Is wealth or law more important to a cleric of Abadar? Where is the balance for a cleric of Sarenrae who must strike down evil but also seek and allow redemption? How do you balance the different facets of your god’s portfolio?
There needs to be some element of devotion to your god, but it doesn’t have to be absolute, not when the Eldest are “doling out divine power merely because they have so much to spare and it amuses them”. I’ve seen a cleric portrayed as a drunken lecherous conman, with a character arc from scoundrel to reluctant hero. Of course, this concept won’t work with most deities—but it’s conceivable that Sarenrae foresaw promise in him and granted him redemption to redeem others—and himself.
In short: everyone has their own take on roleplaying a cleric—and some might disagree, perhaps vehemently, with another’s approach—but I think that all that really matters is that your approach is reasonable and consistent.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm an atheist IRL who has a hard time with faith... and I've played a lot of Clerics. Some of that is because I like the class. But some of it is also trying to work on something that I don't understand as a means of trying to gain some understanding.
I think this is an entirely normal thing to do via roleplay: you can be something that you're not in real life, after all, and try to explore it. (It also applies in other contexts, like a LOT of trans folks have used roleplay as one tool to help figure ourselves out.)
Thanks for the responses everyone. I mean it.
Sure, but is a cleric having their own agency typically seen as a bug, as the divine magic essay implies, or are there canon clerics that would scoff at that essay? I think that's the bedrock of what I'm trying to ask.
Course there's always Oracles if I did decide to go that route...
Something to understand here is that the single biggest difference between a Cleric and an Oracle is that a Cleric chooses to be a Cleric. It's a path of study, faith, work, and constantly trying to uphold the tenents of your faith.
A Cleric is usually in a faith that they believe in, and so pushing its agenda forward isn't some burdensome challenge (most of the time): it's what they would do anyway.
Kyra (the iconic Cleric) is the best example here: she's a Cleric of Sarenrae, who wants her to heal the sick, help the downtrodden, try to redeem those who have done wrongdoing, and smite those that can't be redeemed. Kyra doesn't do that stuff because Sarenrae demands it: Kyra wanted to do that anyway and Sarenrae's faith is a beacon of light on those goals (not to mention a very powerfuly ally).
Kyra has free will, here: she could wake up tomorrow and retire or decide she now wants to pursue building a financial empire (and Abadar might take her in as a follower). She'd probably lose Sarenrae's blessing, but that's it. She doesn't do that because what she wants and what Sarenrae want are the same: she's there because she wants to be.
I don't think the essay in question conveys how this actually works in the fiction super well, because Clerics tend to gravitate to faiths that align with what they believe in already. Like, a Cleric of Nethys doesn't need their brian scooped out and replaced to be interested in Magic: the only reason to every train for that job in the first place is if you're already REALLY into magic.
Comparatively, an Oracle does not choose. Oracles are cursed and simply have access to power. Mechanically the big difference here is that an Oracle isn't bound to a deity: if you flagrantly violate the anathema of a deity as an Oracle, while it might piss that deity off, it doesn't impact your abilities in the slightest.
An Oracle can follow a deity if they want to, probably because they believe in it, but they don't have to and if they don't, nothing really changes.
I've just always seen clerics played as being like 'Oh no, I didn't REALLY do anything, it was all my God,' as they're 1 hp away from death, which again seems self debasing.
I think that's just a certain style of playing a Cleric. It's definitely not the only one. A Cleric of Shelyn should take pride in their art: they created it. Shelyn doesn't want the credit. Likewise back when Gorum was around, he wanted followers to test themselves in battle. Victory belongs to the person doing the fighting, not Gorum, and Gorum never expected otherwise.
Some deities may expect more obedience and praise than others, but demanding this kind of self-debasement isn't actually that common among the main deities. To use Kyra again as an example, when she does some great dead, she might do it in Sarenrae's name, but she's not acting like she had nothing to do with the outcome. And if she tried, Merisiel (her wife) would protest. ;)
If 'humility is not thinking less of yourself, but thinking of yourself less,' then it should be able to coexist with a healthy level of pride. A cleric of saerenrae should be allowed to own the fact that they just nearly got themselves killed while fighting to help others, while acknowledging there's more to be done, IMO.
They definitely do!
Clerics are people, and people can have pride. This can also get to the point of being downright prideful, and even a good deity like Sarenrae has had followers in the past that were overly prideful and not exactly the best examples of the faith. And that's before talking about other gods like Abadar or Asmodeus, who are not known for having humble followers. ;)
Clerics are also often imperfect. Even if you want to push the faith of a given deity, you're may fall short yourself sometimes. That can make for some very interesting stories, and some deities are more forgiving of that than others.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've written an Oracle like this, he thinks he's a cleric of Urgathoa, but is heretical by her standards (he's nice and thinks of her as a goddess of plenty and giving the downtrodden a second chance) Calistria is giving him divine power (source of oracular power), while Urgathoa hates him and his following (source of his curse)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Kyra (the iconic Cleric) is the best example here: she's a Cleric of Sarenrae, who wants her to heal the sick, help the downtrodden, try to redeem those who have done wrongdoing, and smite those that can't be redeemed. Kyra doesn't do that stuff because Sarenrae demands it: Kyra wanted to do that anyway and Sarenrae's faith is a beacon of light on those goals (not to mention a very powerfuly ally).
Kyra has free will, here: she could wake up tomorrow and retire or decide she now wants to pursue building a financial empire (and Abadar might take her in as a follower). She'd probably lose Sarenrae's blessing, but that's it. She doesn't do that because what she wants and what Sarenrae want are the same: she's there because she wants to be.
...
If 'humility is not thinking less of yourself, but thinking of yourself less,' then it should be able to coexist with a healthy level of pride. A cleric of saerenrae should be allowed to own the fact that they just nearly got themselves killed while fighting to help others, while acknowledging there's more to be done, IMO.They definitely do!
Clerics are people, and people can have pride. This can also get to the point of being downright prideful, and even a good deity like Sarenrae has had followers in the past that were overly prideful and not exactly the best examples of the faith. And that's before talking about other gods like Abadar or Asmodeus, who are not known for having humble followers. ;)
A good example of a cleric's pride is in an Iconic Encounter story by James L. Sutter about Kyra: To the Last Breath.
The troll broke through the wooden door and entered the refuge. Kyra, sword in hand, stood between the troll and the villagers as he mocked her that her god has abandoned her. After a pause she hit the troll with Fire Ray (a focus spell requiring a ten-minute Refocus in activities such as tending the injured or reassuring children before she could cast it again) to kill him.
Her last line was proud. "You were wrong." Kyra stood over him [the dead troll], looking down calmly. "Whatever happens, the goddess never truly leaves us. She'll walk with me until my last breath. ... Or until yours."
In any gamified situation involving a religion that grants abilities, it is going to be inherently transactional and I don't think that's a healthy place to build an understanding of faith from. Stick to these edicts, perform these actions for spells, gain new spells at specific levels. All very transactional.
Is that not most human religion? Follow our teachings, our book, and get into the good after life, don't follow them and get punishment. You can easily look at that as trade your life for your soul, the ultimate transaction.
Real world religion is understanding the world around you mostly through feelings.
Zoken had a good summery of polytheism in Golarian. Gods are powerful beings that you aspire to be like or as examples to avoid. You might use their teachings to learn and understand the world better, pray to in times of need like asking for help from an organization built to help people in your exact situation, or as forces in the world to work around and through.
A cleric would be someone who sees themselves as being like their god, having the same values and ideals. Spreading the name of your god is spreading those ideals in a simple package. You very well might view the god as more like a mascot for a set of ideals. The faith is in the ideals, the god just so happens to have power/resources and also believe in those ideals.
As you grow and change even a cleric might need to swap gods because their ideals change to fit their changed world view. Or they might cling to their faith that despite things changing they still value the same things.
Make a character and explore their life and what things they believe in, what ideals they hold sacred, then find a god that matches those as best you can. You might find a god that matches you perfectly, or you might struggle with a god who mostly shares your ideals but maybe has one aspect that you don't agree with and have to figure out how to reconcile that. Maybe your one passion that you care about above all else is a thing one or more gods champion but you don't care about or agree with some of their other tenets so you worship a pantheon instead. The tenets, virtues and anathema should be more important to you then the god themselves.
|
|
Whether or not the practice is transactional, I'll not argue.
But I can tell you, in my experience, from the inside, it doesn't feel that way. It feels, from my experience, comforting to know that there is a power that is caring for you and looking after you. It is only natural to tell others about them, and do good in their name.
People who have experienced religious trauma I wouldn't EVER dare suppose how it made them feel. Terrible people are everywhere, including the church. Many people use that feeling of comfort and see it as power and assurance and entitlement, and then justify their own cruel impulses by saying "God told me to do it".
I won't get in to why I think that feeling makes no sense, I was just pointing out that boiling Golarian religion down to transactional while not seeing similar themes in many human religions seemed like a mistake.
You can start elsewhere for both in learning and experiencing them.
I won't get in to why I think that feeling makes no sense, I was just pointing out that boiling Golarian religion down to transactional while not seeing similar themes in many human religions seemed like a mistake.
You can start elsewhere for both in learning and experiencing them.
Monotheism is not transactional because there is only one being ruling everything. Whatever it requires or says affects everything. You can pray to the one god for everything, but that one god has no reason to give you anything as it rules everything with absolute power and dominion. It holds all the cards and needs no transactional relationship because it is competing for nothing. It is everything.
Polytheism is transactional because you pray to the god of harvests for a good harvest, the god of war for victory in war, the god of love for a good marriage, and so on. The particular god offering what you want you pray to and follow. So if the god wants your worship or something from followers, then it must provide something in return for those praying to them or they'll find some new god to pray to for the same thing.
Polytheism is transactional and competitive.
Monotheism is one god rules everything and you have no options to choose otherwise.
That's why polytheistic religions in fantasy worlds make them very different from the monotheistic religions of the modern world. If Golarion was monotheistic, it would be different because the one god who provided power for all must be adhered to by every priest because they run everything.
Polytheistic gods who want their name in the world and are competing for talent aka clerics, they have to respond to those clerics or the cleric will go to the god that will.
Monotheism would be super boring in a fantasy game. It would make the designers looked way too biased to have a single, monotheistic deity that made all the rules and morals for the world. That would be a bad idea for a fantasy game world on top of limiting mechanical design space as well.
No, monotheism is not transactional. Not sure why you would see them as the same. Your only options are follow what the monotheistic wants or suffer the consequences of refusing. You have zero power over the deity.
Remember, this is not a "What if the deity even exists." In Golarion, the deities exist and provide power. So if a monotheistic deity existed and had all the power, it would run the show and there would be nowhere else to go for that power.
One might aid demonic pacts, Faustian bargains, etc., though that then blurs definitions on what counts as divine or not, even if there's technically one capital-D Deity (not touching the Trinity today).
I do agree that a fantasy with one omni-god that made itself and its wishes known (like most Golarion and RPG gods do), religion would be a shallow well from which to draw story elements (which might be best for some campaigns). Monotheism might work if the deity's given enough obstacles that PCs must aid against, and if it supported a diversity of paths. Hinduism comes to mind there, where the deities are ultimately facets of one overarching deity, and Hindus have ample combat in their (awesome) myths. But yeah, that's kinda cheating re: monotheism. A hidden god w/ lots of warring denominations would also work, much like we've seen on Earth w/ hostile schisms and such in every major religion, and nearly all the others too.
---
As for some of others' earlier comments, their contrast highlights my earlier point that RPing resonates much differently than what it feels like from the inside of belief (depending of course on if it's a dedication coloring how one navigates life vs. a cultural overlay vs. endless other variant ways to approach all this.)
Don't have immediate thoughts on a Golarion deity that promotes critical thinking except that having an internal skeptic is something that Earth churches (and governments and media outlets (et al)) have done to avoid confirmation bias. It's a mark of truth seeking, so maybe a deity with that Domain? Or Knowledge of course, where learning & investigation should fall. Isn't there a science deity? Your Cleric could be the peer-reviewer.
I will say, Pathfinder's particular brand of "religion" is something that's not quite mappable to the real-world - at least, not if you view it as a singular denomination of "religion".
The gods of the Universe are real, they have power that is real, and they will use it to continue to shape and influence the Universe if they see fit to. Mortal "faith" in this setting - at least, from my corner of the room - sits a lot closer to a "smudged" (for lack of a better term) version of polytheism, animism, and (depending on the area) hierarchical faith.
Individual mortals all over Golarion normally practice a light-to-moderate version of polytheism, because when the general wisdom is that offering some fried tofu to Daikitsu will have her smile upon your harvest, it doesn't matter if you personally practice Pharasmin traditions a little more - you still would like the harvest to have its best chance! You may still crave the thrill of battle even now that Our Lord In Iron has passed, and so the teachings of Irori can may help perfect your form so you may continue to slay in respect to his name.
In these cases, mortals place their "faith" in these gods in a slightly more transactional manner, where they attempt to tend to their good graces and avoid their ire so that their everyday lives are made better for it. While singular people may pay more respect to some gods than others, they have an understanding that these powerful beings may help them in return for devoting at least an iota of their brainspace to respecting their existence. People are free to not pay these respects as they wish (though some gods unfortunately may not take kindly to mortals expressing their free will, especially if they brandish it proudly), but they do so with the understanding that they will walk a path without divine assistance (or even additional obstacles, if you cross the wrong deity or associated folk).
Clerics and Champions (and other organized faithful), meanwhile, have a slightly more hierarchical understanding. Where "normal" folk see the gods as more or less equally powerful influences on their lives that they may or may not ply for aid (or at least lack of destruction), the organized faithful of Golarion see their "chosen" deity as one that they align with on a more fundamental level. While many still respect the power that other gods have, and may still even perform transactional practices for them as the average mortal does, they have likely aligned with their chosen deity for more deeply-rooted reasons. Usually, the chosen deity is one that the mortal already sort-of aligns with, or at the very least one that they believe will point their lives in a direction of their choosing. A nobleman's child may join the Church of Abadar to learn to curb his unhealthy spending habits, or a former Chelaxian slave may become a Sarenite due to their aligned abhorrence for the practice.
This is all not even mentioning the various non-god-related faiths that exist within Golarion, many of which are closer (but still not exacrtly) mappable to IRL asceticism or animistic approaches. They focus more on seeing the big picture around your communities or your own personal ecosystems and, while many don't eschew deity worship outright, they narrow the scope of their edicts and anathemas to those that are more immediate to the self and those living beings around you.
Polytheism is transactional because you pray to the god of harvests for a good harvest, the god of war for victory in war, the god of love for a good marriage, and so on. The particular god offering what you want you pray to and follow. So if the god wants your worship or something from followers, then it must provide something in return for those praying to them or they'll find some new god to pray to for the same thing.
Polytheism is transactional and competitive.
There is more variety than that.
Some gods like Huitzilopochtli need to satiated with blood or the world would end.
I don't think any theory on religion in Golarion would manage to cross the gap between tables.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To answer this question immediately:
I'm left wondering if there's space for a cleric that thinks like an individual at least a little bit. I mean there's the splinter faith feat, but even that doesn't quite seem to contradict the 'unthinking zealot' portrayal in the essay. If there's space for a Nietzschean-lite cleric who deliberately seeks out situations where their faith will be tested and deliberately pushes the limits of their deity's without breaking them, and with intent to refine them. Or just someone who sees their deity as a friend and confidant rather than a stompy master...
There absolutely is room for this; your Cleric very much does not need to be a zealot, and many deities very much go against the "perpetually angry tyrant" archetype and can even be quite friendly with their worshipers. Clerics in particular are meant to be the people other worshipers come to whenever they seek answers or guidance regarding their faith, so it is also often in their interest to be able to articulate the merits of their deity from a place of genuine understanding, rather than blind devotion. Becoming a Cleric or Champion of a deity does require devoting yourself to their faith, but that faith doesn't mean debasing yourself or shutting down your critical thinking, so much as embodying those deities' principles to the fullest. This does usually mean taking on those principles far beyond the extent most other mortals would, but depending on the deity those principles can be in service of personal agency and greater understanding, rather than repression and ignorance.
For specific deities, I would particularly look towards deities that have both freedom and knowledge as their domains, like so:
All of which is to say: if you want a Cleric in Pathfinder who actively questions dogma and approaches their faith through critical thinking and personal growth, rather than blind devotion and self-abasement, you absolutely can have exactly that, and in fact several deities will expressly encourage you to do this. There are of course other deities whose faiths strike more parallels with real-life religions, including repressive belief systems, institutionalized corruption, and abuses of power, but the game tends to consistently point these out as problems. Beyond Clerics and Champions, there are also alternative paths to faith, such as the Animist and their close relationship to apparitions or the Druid and their worship of nature, so there are plenty of ways to approach a character with healthy spiritual or religious beliefs in-game.
Polytheism is transactional because you pray to the god of harvests for a good harvest, the god of war for victory in war, the god of love for a good marriage, and so on. The particular god offering what you want you pray to and follow. So if the god wants your worship or something from followers, then it must provide something in return for those praying to them or they'll find some new god to pray to for the same thing.
Polytheism is transactional and competitive.
There is more variety than that.
Some gods like Huitzilopochtli need to satiated with blood or the world would end.
Not sure how this changes anything. Just means one god must be paid in blood or supposedly the world ends. That is still transactional.
Like Rovagug escaping or Yog-Sothoth manifesting in Golarion. Or Fenris Wolf swallowing the Sun in Norse mythos.
I don't see how it matters if the transactional relationship is driven by fear, beneficial benefit, or malevolent desire with polytheism.
In polytheism the reasons are many for following a particular god or entity.
A priest that has to sacrifice people for blood to feed their god or the world ends is a very direct transactional relationship.
Monotheism there is no real concern about a Huitzilopochtli. He means nothing. There is only one being that decides if things end or continue. Nothing you can do about it. Not pay in blood or anything else. There is no transaction, just one source making all the decisions based on their criteria. Very different and would lead to a very different world than the one in Golarion or societies where polytheism exists.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To answer this question immediately:
I'm left wondering if there's space for a cleric that thinks like an individual at least a little bit. I mean there's the splinter faith feat, but even that doesn't quite seem to contradict the 'unthinking zealot' portrayal in the essay. If there's space for a Nietzschean-lite cleric who deliberately seeks out situations where their faith will be tested and deliberately pushes the limits of their deity's without breaking them, and with intent to refine them. Or just someone who sees their deity as a friend and confidant rather than a stompy master...There absolutely is room for this; your Cleric very much does not need to be a zealot, and many deities very much go against the "perpetually angry tyrant" archetype and can even be quite friendly with their worshipers. Clerics in particular are meant to be the people other worshipers come to whenever they seek answers or guidance regarding their faith, so it is also often in their interest to be able to articulate the merits of their deity from a place of genuine understanding, rather than blind devotion. Becoming a Cleric or Champion of a deity does require devoting yourself to their faith, but that faith doesn't mean debasing yourself or shutting down your critical thinking, so much as embodying those deities' principles to the fullest. This does usually mean taking on those principles far beyond the extent most other mortals would, but depending on the deity those principles can be in service of personal agency and greater understanding, rather than repression and ignorance.
For specific deities, I would particularly look towards deities that have both freedom and knowledge as their domains, like so:
...
Awesome, thanks! I'll look them over more closely, but Zjar-Tovan and Aakriti sound like what I'm looking for. Aakriti is maybe a weird choice as an "ooze deity," but their anathema sounds great: "reject creatures or information due to bigoted or rigid beliefs." That sounds like an excellent questioner of faith. Similarly, Zjar-Tovan's edict "do not allow your purpose to be overly guided by another’s will," is an excellent example of avoiding blind dogma. Thanks for the information!
I just want to chime in to say that I grew up religious, became an atheist, and like to play religious characters because I have all the "training" to roleplay a religious person well, and it's fun to imagine there actually being a powerful entity worthy of that level of devotion.
The entity being worthy of your devotion is kind of key there. You have to have a character with firmly held beliefs that align with the deity in question to such an extent that your character would follow them faithfully to further their shared goals.
It's like selling your soul to a devil for power, but that power is specifically given for the purpose of fulfilling yours and that devil's goals, and when you die you get rewarded for it... Being a cleric is kind of a sweet deal.
|
|
Orochifuror, I'm not arguing whether or not it's transactional, because I acknowledge my bias in the matter, However, I will thank you not to say my feelings make no sense.
Deriven Firelion: let's check our bias when it comes to monotheism. You are likely not intending to, but because of the connotations of the word "transactional" it sounds like you are mocking polytheists. Let's remember to offer everyone the respect we would like shown to us and our beliefs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think any theory on religion in Golarion would manage to cross the gap between tables.
Nor should one. That would take a lot of labor to limited effect and minimal payoff. Plus it's too personal and abstract, contentious even among those that worship (etc) in the same buildings. Same could be said about political theory or other touchy cultural topics; it's better to set them aside during one's fun time. It'd be awkward if Deriven and I broke into a debate about how Earth's monotheistic religions do display transactional features while other players plotted to thwart a Runelord. More so given limited play time.
Unless the whole table decides that's fun of course, but Pathfinder feels like an odd venue in which to flex those philosophical muscles. Here in the forums though where engagement is tangential and optional, wheee!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In economics, one of the major x-factors to tackle is the irrationality of market forces. And that took far too long to accept despite those forces being ya' know people. Now consider religion which lacks such quantifiable costs & benefits. Calling religion in all its variants as well as religion-adjacent practices transactional is akin to calling romance transactional. Are there people for both that approach them as a transaction? Certainly! Stories in their lore support that notion. (And one can debate what success means given that). But to somebody swept away by love or whose religion identifies themself and defines their world, that transaction talk can sound absurd or contrary to the notion. Funny thing is if one applies rigor to the latter or gussies up the former, one can reconcile the dichotomy.* Couples in arranged marriages do have a low divorce rate. :)
Contrast being immersed and navigating from within the religious landscape with PF where we have explicit numbers, objective knowledge, and (usually) no emotional investment/coercion/bias in one's PC's religious choices. Players choose a religion in pursuit of the table's goals in playing Pathfinder, often then crafting a character to match. That's purely transactional (usually), w/ a deity's mechanical benefits front and center. Check some boxes, flavor one's dialogue, and so on only to set it aside at the end of the session. So different.
Just putting that out there there as my thought exercise you can join me in if desired. Cheers.
---
*And perhaps should given how relationships can flourish with romance, and romance can benefit from sober appraisal. Similar with religion, which IMO requires mature analysis and skeptical deconstruction to overcome human biases.
Also, despite the philosophically rigorous** arguments trotted out by proselytizers, if you delve into their own journeys they're more often one akin to falling in love than deciding what's true with objectivity. The more successful ones focus on personal experience. (And it's often said apologists are addressing their own flock more than outsiders, giving their own people enough rigor to satiate doubt.) It'd be an odd RPG that addressed such nuances.
**cough, cough.