I think its very likely that many gods will be coming back in 5E. Ao is reforging the Tablets of Fate (which from what I've read will make deities unkillable again).
Well.. I do know some Gods have family of some kind, be it a father, a mother, brothers, or sisters. Provided the deceased God was on good terms with them, a related God might take in his cousin's disciples out of sympathy and understanding. At least I think some of them should, if they value compassion and goodness.
I don't see why not. There are many deities in DnD, but that doesn't mean commoners pick one God to believe in. You donate a little extra to the God of the Sun for extra sunlight on the day of your daughter's marriage. You say a small prayer to the Plague God for him to not infest you with herpes when you're about to bang a hooker, or for him to keep away from your live-stock. Paladins, Clerics, and Champions, only favor their deity over the rest, but they still acknowledge another deity's existance, especially evil ones as holy warriors are committed to fight and protect against them. I don't think Helm, who values strategy, would turn away capable good natured warriors, or dismiss their unique training in times of war.
I think its very likely that many gods will be coming back in 5E. Ao is reforging the Tablets of Fate (which from what I've read will make deities unkillable again).
From what I've been reading, and this little piece of information, I'm starting to like where 5e is heading more and more.
@Eidolon, Deities have some influence over their portfolios. Bhaal was actually god of Death, but he made that into causing death/i.e. murder. When Kelemvor wrested that away from Cyric, he became a very different God of Death- judging the souls who had passed over, hating undeath, etc. But they still had the same portfolio (death), they just interpreted it in different ways.
You might be thinking of Myrkul, who was the lord of the dead and whose portfolio Kelemvor got later.
This thread is extremely interesting on so many different levels for me... My 2 cents: when a deity dies, it is possible for the cleric to still retain his/her spells if the dead god's portfolio is absorbed by another deity. One example is what happened under the disappearance of Waukeen (but there are other examples too): during the ToT, she was captured by the demon lord Graz'zt. Lliira, the Goddess of Joy, took on her portfolio and took care of her followers, granting them spells and such.
I think its very likely that many gods will be coming back in 5E. Ao is reforging the Tablets of Fate (which from what I've read will make deities unkillable again).
From what I've been reading, and this little piece of information, I'm starting to like where 5e is heading more and more.
I think its very likely that many gods will be coming back in 5E. Ao is reforging the Tablets of Fate (which from what I've read will make deities unkillable again).
From what I've been reading, and this little piece of information, I'm starting to like where 5e is heading more and more.
If 5ed turns out to be a horrible uninteresting game system, but they somehow manage to fix the story of the forgotten realms, I will still consider it a success.
@Eidolon Indeed, the Cyrinishad, the book that was intended to make everyone into a worshipper of Cyric by reading it, drove Cyric crazy when he read it. I'm not sure what that says about Cyric...
It says that Cyric is a lousy writer, that's for sure.
Is it just me, or does Ed Greenwood look *just* like Elminster? If he was an actor, I'd expect him to be playing Gandalf. And I took a writing class from Reggie Lee Byers at Tampa University, back in the early 90's. It was nice to see him again.
The funny thing about deities in FT, is that many mortals can become deities, the dead three being the best example in this moment (Bane, Myrkul and Bhaal).
What i see from this is that the mortal personality that become a deity in FR is only a dress for that portfolio, the truly divine essence is the portfolio itself cos as some people told a god can even donate/give up one of his/her portfolios.
I base this opinion as a deity, no matter whom is the mortal that dress the portfolio, can never go against his/her portfolio (if someone know an exception please post it here along it's consequences).
But as there is some other godly beings that don't need a portfolio to be divine (Lady of Pain being the first exemple comming in my mind), maybe divinity isn't reduced only to gods or portfolios (for more strange that this statement can appear).
Another intesting thing is that a cleric doesn't need to follow a god to have spells, a general cleric can worship all the phanteon as one, or even drag his/her power from a concept, rather than a deity itself (what enforce my theory that divinity belongs to the portfolio, and not to the deity itself).
The best examples for what i say are:
"Fall from Grace" the Succubus Lawful Neutral joinable NPC from Planescape: Torment, as she drags her powers from the universe itself as a member of the sensation faction her focus in feel new experiences fuel her spells (and yes, lawful neutral, look in PS:T for more details).
"Zhjaeve" an Lawful neutral Githzerai joinable NPC from Neverwinter Nights 2 that drag her powers from her own beliefs, as apparently worship a god for a githzerai is pretty much the same as slavery (that they suffer in the hands of the illithd in the past).
So with all this said, in my view the portfolios are immortal thing while the conscience that use them are only tools that focus that portfolio in a way or another (as the difference of the portfolio's use stated in Myrkul's and Kelemvor's use of dead portfolio for example).
Actually @kamuizin, in the earlier editions of D&D it was perfectly possible to play a generic priest, worshipping no specific deity. In fact, this was the expected default behavior.
Actually @kamuizin, in the earlier editions of D&D it was perfectly possible to play a generic priest, worshipping no specific deity. In fact, this was the expected default behavior.
Even today, you can...in generic D&D. Bur the realms has NEVER worked like that, and i really like how the realms works...Worship one of us, or forever torment in the wall of the faithless >.>
i hate that fucking wall, wished to had a chance to destroy it in NWN2 MotB, but the game prevent us from challenge Kelemvor when we meet him at the end (stupid WotC restrictions...), that really get me pissed off, as i had the fucking Myrkul's essence and i couldn't use it there (the only special essence in game that good characters can achieve as it's the only moment "eternal rest" feat generate a essence).
In my view if main char consumed Myrkul essence he would be able to partially control the plane, supressing any attempt of Kelemvor to banish him (as he told if main char attempted to destroy the wall), or at least to feed the wall with myrkul's essence, taking the fack that myrkul made the wall, by feeding it with his essence could be the only way to satisfy the wall's hunger, nullifying it.
The game there give an false feeling that you could choose the freedom good patch (war against kelemvor) instead of a cruel duty (side with kelemvor).
@Kamuizin I think at the time that Kelemvor was actually considered a good Deity, but even he couldn't do anything about the Wall of the Faithless. It may have been set up by Jergal... or Ao. We simply don't know.
He could, @LadyRhian, he openly told the character that he has the power to undo the wall and when he became a deity he thought about it, but then with time he apparently found "reason and need" for the existance of the wall of faithless.
In my gameplay i choose to made war and to fight against Kelemvor, at the end he didn't care much as he says that the only reason he didn't banished everyone that attacked the city was because he saw justice in my motivations. By the way he's a lawful neutral deity.
Kelemvor in MotB tell the main char that he will let him try to take off his soul from the wall, and only that. As i sided against him i had a banter choice of defiance, to say that i would put the wall down, he then says that's impossible and even so, if i attempted to do it he would immediatly banish me from his realm.
Jergal at this moment is a scrible only, as he open hand of most of his power when Bhaal, Bane and myrkul challenged him on the past for power. AO would not involve himself, i never saw AO involving himself directly in any D&D plataform game besides planescape: Torment (on the sigil's bar where you recruit Dak'kon, the O NPC).
@Kamuizin I think at the time that Kelemvor was actually considered a good Deity, but even he couldn't do anything about the Wall of the Faithless. It may have been set up by Jergal... or Ao. We simply don't know.
Kelemvor has always been a Lawful Neutral deity...HE views death as neither good nor evil, but a truth of the universe...Undeath is a perversion of that truth.
@Kamuizin Okay, I have never played that game... and now I don't want to. You're right that this isn't right. On the other hand, I wonder how many people agree with you that follow a real-life deity that will torture you for eternity if you don't live up to their standards...
The problem is that isn't a torture question, The function of the wall of faithless is to bind any soul that didn't devoted itself to a single deity during his life time, the wall make no distinction of good or evil, so a chaotic evil bloodlusted thief that paid tributes to Talos for example, in his death would go to Talos realm, while a Neutral Good hero that saved many in his life time but didn't paid tribute to any god would perish to oblivion in the wall of faithless when he dies.
The greatest issue with the wall, is that it isn't a torture thing it's oblivion, any faithless soul bound to the wall will be slowly consumed by it until oblivion.
The wall is a new thing anyway, it was created by Myrkul, an evil deity and it's awersome stupid why Kelemvor being a lawful neutral deity would agree with it's existance. It's an huge tiranny in fact, as Kelemvor abominate all kind of undeath and condem any faithless death to oblivion, taking in fact that one of Kelemvor portfolios is justice, well something is very wrong in that.
Before the wall people where send to multiverse realms that better fit their alignment after death as petitioners, what was truly a better solution.
NWN2 was highly supported by WotC, as in MotB you give Myrkul dying existance true death (what make a huge change in D&D lore in my view), so if they didn't want a direct confrontation between main char and kelemvor an option to feed the wall with myrkul's essence would solve the problem.
To end, i evaluate NWN2 as a normal game, don't worth a replay, but it's expansion, Mask of the Betrayer is truly a great game with only this huge roleplay problem that i explained above.
Well, I thought that the wall of the faithless was allowed to give people a reason to actually worship a god.
Didn't Kelemvor initially make his realm a place that any sould can reach just by being good, which ended up with a huge number of people sacrificing themselves in battle willingly just to reach his realm?
Well Kelemvor is neutral, he is not "good" by any real means...and the wall is the boogey man of self preservation. If noone worshiped the gods, the gods will all die. So "you worship us and keep us alive...or we will make you wish you did forever"
If the wall isn't there, though, where do the faithless souls go? It's just as much of a punishment to be wandering around forever doing nothing. Except that in the wall, you don't have to worry about being kidnapped by Demons and Devils (Tanar'ri and Baatezu) to feed the troops in the Blood War, or being forcibly conscripted into such. We also don't know the fate of the souls in the wall. Are they utterly obliterated, or reborn and given a chance to start again?
The Mask of the Betrayer was based exactly in the wall's hunger as
main char there by a reason of events is inflicted with the wall's hunger in reason to a game plot, and he start to devour spirits, thus become know as the "spirit eater" (MotB is made in Rashemen, the land of the spirits, so a lot of things happen on MotB of coure)
The official rules says that a petitioner can't evolve in levels, what i truly don't like, but they can live (somehow) at least (and this no level up to petitioner aren't exactly a strict rules as D&D make some exceptions, so...)
Comments
I don't see why not. There are many deities in DnD, but that doesn't mean commoners pick one God to believe in. You donate a little extra to the God of the Sun for extra sunlight on the day of your daughter's marriage. You say a small prayer to the Plague God for him to not infest you with herpes when you're about to bang a hooker, or for him to keep away from your live-stock. Paladins, Clerics, and Champions, only favor their deity over the rest, but they still acknowledge another deity's existance, especially evil ones as holy warriors are committed to fight and protect against them. I don't think Helm, who values strategy, would turn away capable good natured warriors, or dismiss their unique training in times of war.
My 2 cents: when a deity dies, it is possible for the cleric to still retain his/her spells if the dead god's portfolio is absorbed by another deity. One example is what happened under the disappearance of Waukeen (but there are other examples too): during the ToT, she was captured by the demon lord Graz'zt. Lliira, the Goddess of Joy, took on her portfolio and took care of her followers, granting them spells and such.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/features/9294-The-State-of-Dungeons-Dragons-Future
"So... how are they going to explain that one Amaunator mission in Baldur's Gate 2?"
PS: I got the playtest for 5E and we tried it out.. looks horrible. We were all pretty bummed.
Yeah, I think everyone thinks that. Isn't Elminster the character that he plays in his own private PnP sessions anyway?
What i see from this is that the mortal personality that become a deity in FR is only a dress for that portfolio, the truly divine essence is the portfolio itself cos as some people told a god can even donate/give up one of his/her portfolios.
I base this opinion as a deity, no matter whom is the mortal that dress the portfolio, can never go against his/her portfolio (if someone know an exception please post it here along it's consequences).
But as there is some other godly beings that don't need a portfolio to be divine (Lady of Pain being the first exemple comming in my mind), maybe divinity isn't reduced only to gods or portfolios (for more strange that this statement can appear).
Another intesting thing is that a cleric doesn't need to follow a god to have spells, a general cleric can worship all the phanteon as one, or even drag his/her power from a concept, rather than a deity itself (what enforce my theory that divinity belongs to the portfolio, and not to the deity itself).
The best examples for what i say are:
"Fall from Grace" the Succubus Lawful Neutral joinable NPC from Planescape: Torment, as she drags her powers from the universe itself as a member of the sensation faction her focus in feel new experiences fuel her spells (and yes, lawful neutral, look in PS:T for more details).
"Zhjaeve" an Lawful neutral Githzerai joinable NPC from Neverwinter Nights 2 that drag her powers from her own beliefs, as apparently worship a god for a githzerai is pretty much the same as slavery (that they suffer in the hands of the illithd in the past).
So with all this said, in my view the portfolios are immortal thing while the conscience that use them are only tools that focus that portfolio in a way or another (as the difference of the portfolio's use stated in Myrkul's and Kelemvor's use of dead portfolio for example).
In my view if main char consumed Myrkul essence he would be able to partially control the plane, supressing any attempt of Kelemvor to banish him (as he told if main char attempted to destroy the wall), or at least to feed the wall with myrkul's essence, taking the fack that myrkul made the wall, by feeding it with his essence could be the only way to satisfy the wall's hunger, nullifying it.
The game there give an false feeling that you could choose the freedom good patch (war against kelemvor) instead of a cruel duty (side with kelemvor).
In my gameplay i choose to made war and to fight against Kelemvor, at the end he didn't care much as he says that the only reason he didn't banished everyone that attacked the city was because he saw justice in my motivations. By the way he's a lawful neutral deity.
Kelemvor in MotB tell the main char that he will let him try to take off his soul from the wall, and only that. As i sided against him i had a banter choice of defiance, to say that i would put the wall down, he then says that's impossible and even so, if i attempted to do it he would immediatly banish me from his realm.
Jergal at this moment is a scrible only, as he open hand of most of his power when Bhaal, Bane and myrkul challenged him on the past for power. AO would not involve himself, i never saw AO involving himself directly in any D&D plataform game besides planescape: Torment (on the sigil's bar where you recruit Dak'kon, the O NPC).
The greatest issue with the wall, is that it isn't a torture thing it's oblivion, any faithless soul bound to the wall will be slowly consumed by it until oblivion.
The wall is a new thing anyway, it was created by Myrkul, an evil deity and it's awersome stupid why Kelemvor being a lawful neutral deity would agree with it's existance. It's an huge tiranny in fact, as Kelemvor abominate all kind of undeath and condem any faithless death to oblivion, taking in fact that one of Kelemvor portfolios is justice, well something is very wrong in that.
Before the wall people where send to multiverse realms that better fit their alignment after death as petitioners, what was truly a better solution.
NWN2 was highly supported by WotC, as in MotB you give Myrkul dying existance true death (what make a huge change in D&D lore in my view), so if they didn't want a direct confrontation between main char and kelemvor an option to feed the wall with myrkul's essence would solve the problem.
To end, i evaluate NWN2 as a normal game, don't worth a replay, but it's expansion, Mask of the Betrayer is truly a great game with only this huge roleplay problem that i explained above.
Didn't Kelemvor initially make his realm a place that any sould can reach just by being good, which ended up with a huge number of people sacrificing themselves in battle willingly just to reach his realm?
The Mask of the Betrayer was based exactly in the wall's hunger as
The official rules says that a petitioner can't evolve in levels, what i truly don't like, but they can live (somehow) at least (and this no level up to petitioner aren't exactly a strict rules as D&D make some exceptions, so...)