test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

gods

xmarik69xxmarik69x Member Posts: 37 Arc User
i know that the various crystal spheres (campaign settings) can be traveled to except for Athas (Darksun) which is cut off from all the rest, but what I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is how are some Greyhawk Gods, gods in the Forgotten Realms? I.E. Kord and Orcus are the two I've come across mention of in game
«1

Comments

  • nitocris83nitocris83 Member, Cryptic Developer, Administrator Posts: 4,498 Cryptic Developer
    IIRC Orcus is present in Forgotten Realm adventures.
  • pteriaspterias Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 661 Arc User
    The same gods can be worshipped across different planets and planes, it's just a matter of knowledge of them and the desire to worship being spread from place to place. Like Tyr is one of the FR gods. Yes, it's the exact same Tyr from the Norse mythos, he just managed to somehow become known and worshipped on Toril where the rest of the Norse mythos is otherwise unknown.

    From a more gamist perspective, the reason Kord is in there is because during 4E, Kord became a core deity of 4E along with the likes of Pelor (another GH god) and Asmodeus, and they shoe-horned all of those into FR as well. They even storied it up like Lathander died and Pelor took his place. With 5E, they brought all the FR gods back to life and just sort of "forgot" about most of the 4E deities they had jammed in. I'm not sure if Kord is even still officially considered a known FR god, but because of inter-planar travel and knowledge, there would be nothing from stopping a ripped, shirtless cleric of Kord running around Toril wrestling bears. :smiley:
  • xmarik69xxmarik69x Member Posts: 37 Arc User
    pterias said:

    With 5E, they brought all the FR gods back to life and just sort of "forgot" about most of the 4E deities they had jammed in.

    Wait, what? Now I'm confused... if they brought back all the dead FR gods to life, then Bane should be alive which Cyric took the domain of, Myrkul should be alive which Kelemvor to the domain of, and yet Helm is dead... so which Mystra is alive? the original or is it still Midnight?

  • pteriaspterias Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 661 Arc User
    xmarik69x said:

    pterias said:

    With 5E, they brought all the FR gods back to life and just sort of "forgot" about most of the 4E deities they had jammed in.

    Wait, what? Now I'm confused... if they brought back all the dead FR gods to life, then Bane should be alive which Cyric took the domain of, Myrkul should be alive which Kelemvor to the domain of, and yet Helm is dead... so which Mystra is alive? the original or is it still Midnight?
    Well they haven't been super-duper clear on all of it, info is kinda spread all over the place, which is frustrating. But yeah, most if not all are back, but the FR specific replacements (like Cyric, Kelemvor, etc.) are still around too. I'm under the impression that yes, Bane is back as the God of Tyranny, Myrkul is back as the God of Death (as opposed to Kelemvor being the God of "the Dead"), Helm is definitely back, and I *think* Midnight is still Mystra.

    Mystra seems to get dead and stay dead a lot because a lot of the big shakeups happen because she dies in dramatic ways or because massive trauma to the Weave rips her to shreds. :smiley: Apparently being responsible for the very fabric of magic is a particularly dangerous job for a god.

    Disclaimer: I'm not a super-mega-FR-lore-fiend, so some of my statements may not be entirely accurate, but I'm about 95% sure of about 95% of it. :wink:
  • greywyndgreywynd Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 7,150 Arc User
    Orcus isn't a god. He's a demon lord from the Abyss. The Abyss makes contact with many realities.
    I'm not looking for forgiveness, and I'm way past asking permission. Earth just lost her best defender, so we're here to fight. And if you want to stand in our way, we'll fight you too.
  • lantern22lantern22 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,111 Arc User
    Where is Zebular these days when the discussion goes theoretical. I haven't seen a scanned copy of one of his old D&D books for what seems like ages.
  • wintersmokewintersmoke Member Posts: 1,641 Arc User
    lantern22 said:

    Where is Zebular these days when the discussion goes theoretical. I haven't seen a scanned copy of one of his old D&D books for what seems like ages.

    His contract was terminated for inappropriate use of office supplies. :smirk:
  • xmarik69xxmarik69x Member Posts: 37 Arc User
    pterias said:

    xmarik69x said:

    pterias said:

    With 5E, they brought all the FR gods back to life and just sort of "forgot" about most of the 4E deities they had jammed in.

    Wait, what? Now I'm confused... if they brought back all the dead FR gods to life, then Bane should be alive which Cyric took the domain of, Myrkul should be alive which Kelemvor to the domain of, and yet Helm is dead... so which Mystra is alive? the original or is it still Midnight?
    Helm is definitely back
    if Helm is most definitely back, why is it in game they keep saying he's dead, since the game is 5e?
  • mithrosnomoremithrosnomore Member Posts: 693 Arc User
    xmarik69x said:



    if Helm is most definitely back, why is it in game they keep saying he's dead, since the game is 5e?

    The game may be taking queues from 5E now, but when those missions were put into the game it was strictly 4E at the time.
  • shadoewraythshadoewrayth Member Posts: 183 Arc User
    xmarik69x said:


    if Helm is most definitely back, why is it in game they keep saying he's dead, since the game is 5e?



    His contract was terminated for inappropriate use of office supplies. :smirk:

    That is why Helm isn't around anymore too!!
  • pitshadepitshade Member Posts: 5,665 Arc User
    Helm having returned from the dead is part of the Reclamation Rock storyline.
    "We have always been at war with Dread Vault" ~ Little Brother
  • wintersmokewintersmoke Member Posts: 1,641 Arc User

    xmarik69x said:



    if Helm is most definitely back, why is it in game they keep saying he's dead, since the game is 5e?

    The game may be taking queues from 5E now, but when those missions were put into the game it was strictly 4E at the time.
    I forget if it was part of the EE, or the opening to Chult but there was a dialog with the dwarf cleric in helm's hold to the effect that the refugees had been sent to him by Helm.
  • thevampinatorthevampinator Member Posts: 307 Arc User
    edited June 2018
    I think they should update the deity list at character creation. To Include several of the now restored gods. One for each race. Drow, Lolth, Eilistraee. Those deities should be included. Also deities for each alignment too.
    So basically it would go like this.

    Lawful Good
    Torm
    Bahamut
    Ilmater
    Moradin

    Neutral Good Deities
    Mystra
    Mielikki
    Eldath
    Lathander

    Chaotic Good
    Selune
    Eilistraee
    Tymora
    Sune
    Corellon

    Lawful Neutral
    Azuth
    Helm
    H'oar
    Kelemvor

    True Neutral
    Silvanus
    Oghma
    Gond
    Waukeen

    Chaotic Neutral
    Tempus
    Uthgar
    Leira
    Mask

    Lawful Evil
    Loviatar
    Bane
    Bhaal
    Tiamat

    Neutral Evil
    Shar
    Myrkul
    Auril

    Chaotic Evil
    Lolth
    Talos
    Ghaunadaur
    Malar
    Vhaeraun
    Cyric
    Umberlee
  • shadoewraythshadoewrayth Member Posts: 183 Arc User
    I think deities should be more important as well! Used to play DDO, and loved the way they did stuff, just the game is kind of ... aged now =/
  • greywyndgreywynd Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 7,150 Arc User

    I think they should update the deity list at character creation. To Include several of the now restored gods. One for each race. Drow, Lolth, Eilistraee. Those deities should be included. Also deities for each alignment too.
    So basically it would go like this.

    Lawful Good
    Torm
    Bahamut
    Ilmater
    Moradin

    Neutral Good Deities
    Mystra
    Mielikki
    Eldath
    Lathander

    Chaotic Good
    Selune
    Eilistraee
    Tymora
    Sune
    Corellon

    Lawful Neutral
    Azuth
    Helm
    H'oar
    Kelemvor

    True Neutral
    Silvanus
    Oghma
    Gond
    Waukeen

    Chaotic Neutral
    Tempus
    Uthgar
    Leira
    Mask

    Lawful Evil
    Loviatar
    Bane
    Bhaal
    Tiamat

    Neutral Evil
    Shar
    Myrkul
    Auril

    Chaotic Evil
    Lolth
    Talos
    Ghaunadaur
    Malar
    Vhaeraun
    Cyric
    Umberlee

    Except that the players are supposed to be heroes, and by definition heroes cannot be Evil.
    I'm not looking for forgiveness, and I'm way past asking permission. Earth just lost her best defender, so we're here to fight. And if you want to stand in our way, we'll fight you too.
  • thevampinatorthevampinator Member Posts: 307 Arc User
    edited June 2018
    greywynd said:

    I think they should update the deity list at character creation. To Include several of the now restored gods. One for each race. Drow, Lolth, Eilistraee. Those deities should be included. Also deities for each alignment too.
    So basically it would go like this.

    Lawful Good
    Torm
    Bahamut
    Ilmater
    Moradin

    Neutral Good Deities
    Mystra
    Mielikki
    Eldath
    Lathander

    Chaotic Good
    Selune
    Eilistraee
    Tymora
    Sune
    Corellon

    Lawful Neutral
    Azuth
    Helm
    H'oar
    Kelemvor

    True Neutral
    Silvanus
    Oghma
    Gond
    Waukeen

    Chaotic Neutral
    Tempus
    Uthgar
    Leira
    Mask

    Lawful Evil
    Loviatar
    Bane
    Bhaal
    Tiamat

    Neutral Evil
    Shar
    Myrkul
    Auril

    Chaotic Evil
    Lolth
    Talos
    Ghaunadaur
    Malar
    Vhaeraun
    Cyric
    Umberlee

    Except that the players are supposed to be heroes, and by definition heroes cannot be Evil.
    Well evil doers can still be heros or anti heros. It just is in the context of the matter. One good examples of this is Makos who is in 5e neutral evil. Hes considered a hero and he is Neutral evil. I like Eberrons context of where its not just morally black or white but it could be anything. From a Chaotic evil Gold Dragon to a Lawful Good Red Dragon to a Chaotic good vampire. Kinda wished they moved more along the lines of doing the same with the rest of d&d just my personal opinion.
  • mithrosnomoremithrosnomore Member Posts: 693 Arc User
    edited June 2018

    I think deities should be more important as well! Used to play DDO, and loved the way they did stuff, just the game is kind of ... aged now =/

    Yes and no.

    If the result is that players start picking dieties based upon what buff they can get then I would just as soon leave them as they are.

    If they want to add a diety based campaign with diety-based armor and weapon sets (sort of like the celestial mantle) where players can learn more about their diety as they play through it then I would be all for that.

    =============

    Two other small things.... I would like to be able to change dieties (insert "quest of purification" or something that would allow such a thing as a time sink, including preventing any benefits from worship for some period of time), and I would like to see a few more dieties added to the character selection.

    Nothing that would mess up any of the game's facts or anything, to keep it simple, but just get Ilmater in there, for one example, as a good "all-around" diety choice for anyone, and a "hunter" type diety like Mielikki would fill a niche, I think.
    That sort of thing.
    Post edited by mithrosnomore on
  • greywyndgreywynd Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 7,150 Arc User



    Well evil doers can still be heros or anti heros. It just is in the context of the matter. One good examples of this is Makos who is in 5e neutral evil. Hes considered a hero and he is Neutral evil. I like Eberrons context of where its not just morally black or white but it could be anything. From a Chaotic evil Gold Dragon to a Lawful Good Red Dragon to a Chaotic good vampire. Kinda wished they moved more along the lines of doing the same with the rest of d&d just my personal opinion.

    Makos lich'd out. He's Evil and a villain.
    I'm not looking for forgiveness, and I'm way past asking permission. Earth just lost her best defender, so we're here to fight. And if you want to stand in our way, we'll fight you too.
  • shadoewraythshadoewrayth Member Posts: 183 Arc User

    I think deities should be more important as well! Used to play DDO, and loved the way they did stuff, just the game is kind of ... aged now =/

    Yes and no.

    If the result is that players start picking dieties based upon what buff they can get then I would just as soon leave them as they are.

    If they want to add a diety based campaign with diety-based armor and weapon sets (sort of like the celestial mantle) where players can learn more about their diety as they play through it then I would be all for that.

    =============

    Two other small things.... I would like to be able to change dieties (insert "quest of purification" or something that would allow such a thing as a time sink, including preventing any benefits from worship for some period of time), and I would like to see a few more dieties added to the character selection.

    Nothing that would mess up any of the game's facts or anything, to keep it simple, but just get Lathander in there, for one example, as a good "all-around" diety choice for anyone, and a "hunter" type diety like Mielikki would fill a niche, I think.
    That sort of thing.
    I like the idea of a campaign focused on deities, with boons that reflect the deity of the character (my thought), with the ability to change deity (probably would be a zen store item, honestly, and one free change given to each character pre-existent), and new deities offered. Imagine a boon for someone like Ilmater (one of my favorites) that allows life steal to work in reverse (when damaged), but only for party members, not themselves. So, having a cleric of Ilmater in the group could provide decent healing through the cleric being beaten upon! :D
  • sandukutupusandukutupu Member Posts: 2,285 Arc User
    This thread is hilarious. I can see a mess of developers reading this and saying, "Thankfully no one owns the intellectual property rights on the gods except for themselves." LOL

    Basically you would "think" these other worldly MMOs would come up with their own unique Gods. But most of the time they just pluck them out of the pages of history. Many times, I have actually seen users get upset about how the God was use in context to the story. I admit I got a tad bit miffed about Disney's take on Hades. Greeks believed he was just God of the Dead much like Kelemvor is in Neverwinter. Not an evil deity, but a jailer or warden of the dead. According the tales about Hades, he only was guilty of kidnapping his wife and causing the winters to come. Many religions talk about levels of Hell and thus we get that whole 9 Hells in this game, thanks to Dante's "Inferno".

    My Scourge Warlock in this game, Aero Ironcrown is a worshiper of Asmodeus, but she poses as a follower of Oghma. My gripe about character creation is the inflexible hero role that is forced upon the player.

    wb-cenders.gif
  • greywyndgreywynd Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 7,150 Arc User
    There are some other takes on Hades/Persephone in which they eloped to get away from her mother.

    If you read Dresden you may like the interaction he has with Hades.
    I'm not looking for forgiveness, and I'm way past asking permission. Earth just lost her best defender, so we're here to fight. And if you want to stand in our way, we'll fight you too.
  • pteriaspterias Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 661 Arc User
    Yeah, I'm not a fan of the binary "evil = villain, always" approach, certainly not in D&D. Even if they're not selfless, bubbly-headed heroes, it doesn't mean they're not helpful or even indispensable to the "good" folks. And Makos is not a villain, at least not yet.

    ---

    This thread is hilarious. I can see a mess of developers reading this and saying, "Thankfully no one owns the intellectual property rights on the gods except for themselves." LOL

    Basically you would "think" these other worldly MMOs would come up with their own unique Gods.

    I created my own original pantheon back in the mid 2000's. When 4E came out, they had stolen most of the gods I created, even down to their genders. It was a little depressing. :tongue:

    My gripe about character creation is the inflexible hero role that is forced upon the player.

    "Always the hero" is definitely easier to write and design for. I say that as the DM for a rather long running evil campaign. I feel the extra effort is well worth it though. I certainly enjoy flexibility as a player. It doesn't always have to be about doing the right thing, it can also be about just doing what needs to be done and getting paid well in the process. :wink:
  • xmarik69xxmarik69x Member Posts: 37 Arc User
    could take cues from either the star wars Knights of the Old Republic franchise or Mass Effect franchise to implement a 'morality' mechanic, yes I know those are single player games, but the Star Wars The Old Republic MMO does implement a morality mechanic
  • mithrosnomoremithrosnomore Member Posts: 693 Arc User



    I like the idea of a campaign focused on deities, with boons that reflect the deity of the character (my thought), with the ability to change deity (probably would be a zen store item, honestly, and one free change given to each character pre-existent), and new deities offered. Imagine a boon for someone like Ilmater (one of my favorites) that allows life steal to work in reverse (when damaged), but only for party members, not themselves. So, having a cleric of Ilmater in the group could provide decent healing through the cleric being beaten upon! :D

    Ilmater. Yes. I said Lathander but meant Ilmater.

    Lathander is now Anauroch, or at least he was in 4E. Lathander, to me, had a totally different vibe than Anauroch, though.

    I am hesitant to attaching mechanical advantages to dieties, as I said earlier, but as campaign boons they could be covered up a little bit.

    For example, if someone played a Paladin that followed Sune the boons may not be a perfect fit, but at least there would be other campaigns with other boons that the player could play through and earn, and since you have to select active boons, any damaging effect of "mismatched" dieties and followers would be minimized.

    Unless, of course, these boons were all better than any boons offered by any other campaigns.

    I would not want to see every hunter ranger deciding that they need to follow Sylvanus because that is the only diety that has any boons that will help them.


    As another thing, I would like to see the game "suggest" certain dieties for certain race and/or class choices.
    Just add a little section that says "suggested dieties" above the list of the other dieties.

    That would at least help people that do not know any better make a "sensible" choice beyond the brief description of the dieties.

    Because while I don't want every hunter ranger to be forced to pick Sylvanus, I do think that it hurts to tell prospective hunter rangers that Sylvanus is right in their wheelhouse.

    So an Elf hunter ranger could have Corellon, Sylvanus, probably Chauntea, maybe Selune as their suggested dieties, so people that don't know about any of them could quickly make a "sensible" decision that fits into the campaign world.

    But ultimately I don't think that the payoff is there.
    I mean, fun to talk about, maybe, but I won't be holding my breath.
  • mithrosnomoremithrosnomore Member Posts: 693 Arc User
    xmarik69x said:

    could take cues from either the star wars Knights of the Old Republic franchise or Mass Effect franchise to implement a 'morality' mechanic, yes I know those are single player games, but the Star Wars The Old Republic MMO does implement a morality mechanic

    It's not built into the game.

    I mean, they could add something going forward, but at no time do you get to decide "screw the Dwarves... I'm keeping the Icehammer". >:)

    And if it's just conversational stuff then what does it really matter? Earning evil points for saying "who cares about the people, I'm in it for the money" doesn't much matter if you are going to run the exact same mission and save the people anyway, does it?

    I am not really a fan of this unless you can go beyond just the surface (and I have never seen a video game that could), and a simple points system usually results in some silly outcomes.

    "Killed that guy in cold blood? Okay, not a problem... Just help five little old ladies across the street and you will cancel the evil points out."

    Or maybe "Hmmm, I need more evil points to equip that gear... Guess I'll replay that mission where I can kill all the people for no reason to earn them".

    There were a lot of writings on playing Paladins back in the days of D&D, AD&D, 2nd edition, and even 3.X.
    The term "lawful stupid" was bandied about.

    But when it comes to these morality point systems it seems mostly reversed. The bad guys have to behave in some really stupid ways sometimes to avoid earning "good points".
    Oh, sure, occasionally the good guys might be forced to make a decision that seems pretty horrible in order to avoid earning evil points, but mostly it's the evil side that gets to wear the stupid hat.


    And since these systems push people to the extremes, there is a tendency to want to score the points when you can.

    And that punishes RP. I mean, hey, no one is making anyone make any choice, but again, since the benefits are at the extremes, someone that makes the choices that seem natural to them or to what their character would do tend to fall behind if not just be stranded in the middle somewhere, gaining and losing good and evil ranks and whatever benefits they confer along the way.



  • shadoewraythshadoewrayth Member Posts: 183 Arc User



    I like the idea of a campaign focused on deities, with boons that reflect the deity of the character (my thought), with the ability to change deity (probably would be a zen store item, honestly, and one free change given to each character pre-existent), and new deities offered. Imagine a boon for someone like Ilmater (one of my favorites) that allows life steal to work in reverse (when damaged), but only for party members, not themselves. So, having a cleric of Ilmater in the group could provide decent healing through the cleric being beaten upon! :D

    Ilmater. Yes. I said Lathander but meant Ilmater.

    Lathander is now Anauroch, or at least he was in 4E. Lathander, to me, had a totally different vibe than Anauroch, though.

    I am hesitant to attaching mechanical advantages to dieties, as I said earlier, but as campaign boons they could be covered up a little bit.

    For example, if someone played a Paladin that followed Sune the boons may not be a perfect fit, but at least there would be other campaigns with other boons that the player could play through and earn, and since you have to select active boons, any damaging effect of "mismatched" dieties and followers would be minimized.

    Unless, of course, these boons were all better than any boons offered by any other campaigns.

    I would not want to see every hunter ranger deciding that they need to follow Sylvanus because that is the only diety that has any boons that will help them.


    As another thing, I would like to see the game "suggest" certain dieties for certain race and/or class choices.
    Just add a little section that says "suggested dieties" above the list of the other dieties.

    That would at least help people that do not know any better make a "sensible" choice beyond the brief description of the dieties.

    Because while I don't want every hunter ranger to be forced to pick Sylvanus, I do think that it hurts to tell prospective hunter rangers that Sylvanus is right in their wheelhouse.

    So an Elf hunter ranger could have Corellon, Sylvanus, probably Chauntea, maybe Selune as their suggested dieties, so people that don't know about any of them could quickly make a "sensible" decision that fits into the campaign world.

    But ultimately I don't think that the payoff is there.
    I mean, fun to talk about, maybe, but I won't be holding my breath.
    So, the fact that certain deities are of a specific domain, which often directly benefits very specific worshipers, is bad in your opinion? I mean, that's sort of the entire point of having several deities, they are not just for RP purposes, and more than just names. If you are a pyromancer, it is obviously going to be more beneficial to worship a fire deity over, say, a deity of farming, or nature, and MUCH more beneficial than worshiping an ice deity!

    There are reasons they say things like, "Their worshipers contain many rangers and druids" for a nature deity, or "rogues" for a shadow deity (like Mask)... The domains offered, the benefits, etc benefit those worshiper types the most (that might be considered meta, but consider even in an RP fashion, these people know who would look after their interests the most, so they tend to flock to the deity of 'insert my personal hobbies/job/interests here')

    So, yeah, the boons should benefit certain people more than others to reflect that this is what they do. A deity of war should probably have a good 'war-like' boon, a deity of fire should give fire bonuses (which might make a pyro type even more deadly, but not a lightning based wizard). However, if they build the boons right, they could be used across to other classes. If Sylvanus gave boon choices of either toughening the character like wood (maybe even transforming them into an ent for a bit?), or giving a root effect to attacks (with higher chance if the attack is a taunt), or something...

    Of course, the optimal way would be to design a boon set where the first choices are all the same, but the final-4 depend entirely on which deity you worship, and have a wide enough array of those 4 to allow for all worshipers to have a good pick, no matter which deity.
  • greywyndgreywynd Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 7,150 Arc User
    The idea of believing in a god is because what the character believes in. Not for what they get out of it. There's a reason Drizzt follows Meilikki and not Lolth.
    I'm not looking for forgiveness, and I'm way past asking permission. Earth just lost her best defender, so we're here to fight. And if you want to stand in our way, we'll fight you too.
  • shadoewraythshadoewrayth Member Posts: 183 Arc User
    greywynd said:

    The idea of believing in a god is because what the character believes in. Not for what they get out of it. There's a reason Drizzt follows Meilikki and not Lolth.

    That would be a good reasoning in the real world. In D&D, especially FR (even Dragonlance), deities are very REAL and impactful entities. People are constantly offering sacrifices of some sort to them, even if they don't worship them. Such as a sailor who worships Tymora, will still drop coins into the sea as they board a boat to attempt to buy favor from Umberlee (an evil deity of the oceans). These people know that the deities directly influence their lives, even show up and do things.

    So, yeah, you can say that Drizzt follows Mielikki because that deity espouses the same things that he believes, but, then, that deity also blessed him several times, even brought back friends, and other things. You can say he didn't worship Lolth because he didn't like the things she espoused... but, he also saw the 'blessings' she bestowed in the form of driders of people he knew, or in the form of the magical powers she granted to people (not just priestesses), and other stuff, that he perceived as twisted, perverse, evil... but, most drow do not see them as such, and worship her (or other drow/evil deities).

    These people DO worship because of what the deities can do for them, it isn't just for a set of beliefs (but includes them)
  • greywyndgreywynd Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 7,150 Arc User
    And the Realms also have two other statuses as far as the gods go; the Faithless and the False. The gods do not like lipservice. They want worshippers because they get more themselves that way.

    Did Drizzt have expectations from Lolth? No. Did he have expectations from Mielikki? Again, no. That Mielikki did for him and his friends showed some favor of the god. Not that it was ever expected.
    I'm not looking for forgiveness, and I'm way past asking permission. Earth just lost her best defender, so we're here to fight. And if you want to stand in our way, we'll fight you too.
  • pteriaspterias Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 661 Arc User
    edited June 2018
    Most folks in D&D besides Clerics and Paladins never really get anything out of worshipping a deity, any deity. Occasionally, some super important person might, but generally only if they are doing something of direct interest or importance to that deity. In NW, even getting what we get from Invoking is far more generous than what most can ever expect. About the only thing I can imagine is shifting the Invocation stat thingy to be based on deity, but any more than that would defy expectation.

    That said, I also wish deities here were a bit more interesting to be involved with, but not mechanically so. I guess we can always write them into our own biographies!
This discussion has been closed.