Community

KillerGM wrote:

I'd like to keep to polytheism. One of the things that really sets D&D apart from other worlds and systems is the multitude of deities. I don't think we should have a ton of them (FR, for example, has too many IMO), but we should have a variety.

Out of all of the modules I've been in, both Greyhawk and FR have a ridiculous amount of deities. The reason I like Eberron's gods is because they encompass enough of the basic ideals to allow the player enough option without having to look through six books. Most of Eberron's deities also have access to the Spell Compendium domains, a book I feel needs to be considered a part of the Core series.

Hippokrene wrote:

Has anyone here played Morrowind? The concept of Living Gods interests me. I believe Monkey mentioned something similar in regards to Sorcerer-Kings in the Dark Sun setting.

Here's a thought that just popped into my head. Shiva/Vishnu/Kali - an 'overgod' with three distinct aspects (creator, sustainer, and destroyer) that empowers certain mortals and binds them to an aspect of the universe. So, the god of war might be a man or woman who was a powerful soldier and was joined to the concept of War.  The overgod might do this because it’s nature is so removed from mortal life that it needs a sort of middle man.

Yes, I have. And I loved it!

I like the idea of the Overgods. I, personally, can contribute to this idea, but I would need to borrow a deity from Warhammer. The story would be cool. I no one minds, I will post my thesis on these deities, sometime tomorrow.

crazy_monkey1956 wrote:

We need to leave Spell Compendium out for the moment simply because it is not SRD.

It should be, though...

Hippokrene wrote:

Has anyone here played Morrowind? The concept of Living Gods interests me. I believe Monkey mentioned something similar in regards to Sorcerer-Kings in the Dark Sun setting.

Here's a thought that just popped into my head. Shiva/Vishnu/Kali - an 'overgod' with three distinct aspects (creator, sustainer, and destroyer) that empowers certain mortals and binds them to an aspect of the universe. So, the god of war might be a man or woman who was a powerful soldier and was joined to the concept of War.  The overgod might do this because it’s nature is so removed from mortal life that it needs a sort of middle man.

I really like this idea, although I don't get the reference. Regardless, it would be interesting to show that anyone could, in theory, reach deific level if they strongly enough exemplified a certain concept. It also allows for a pantheon with less "mainstream" deities, if people strongly exemplified certain things (like Dionysus, ancient Greek god of wine). It would also lend itself toward the dieties having stats (very good ones, of course), as someone could, in theory, overthrow a diety and take over his/her portfolio.

I think each diety should only have two or three domains, simply because too much overlap leads to redundancy. If I look through my Frostburn book, I can see several cases where I would never use two certain dieties, as they share very similar portfolios. Similarly, I feel that we should only allow two dieties to share a domain if their other domains are quite different. For example, one could grant the fire and magic domains, and another could grant the water and magic domains, as their overall philosophies are obviously different.

Another idea I have, though I don't think it will be well-recieved, is to get rid of the good, evil, law, and chaos domains, at least if we are using Hippokrene's idea. I simply dislike the idea that some deities are "completely good", or "completely evil", or whatever. If they are simply mortals with greater power, why shouldn't they act like mortals with great power? If a 30th level paladin can still fall and become a blackguard, why can't a 30th level deity paladin?

As for planes, we already have two: the material, which currently has no name, and the Dark Ethereal. Here's my idea- have the other planes be similar in nature to the Dark Ethereal, but tuned to some other "element" besides evil, and linked in different pairs. For example, the water an fire planes could be linked, and the air and earth planes. Crossover between linked planes is relatively common, but crossover and interaction between unlinked planes is almost nonexistant. The astral plane would serve as the link, as it is not attuned to anything, and there could also be a central "super-plane", which has areas representative of each other plane (maybe something like limbo?) The planes would be arranged in a sort of "wheel". The "super-plane" would be in the center, and each "spoke" would be one element. On each "spoke" would be two planes. For example, the evil spoke would have the Dark Ethereal closer to the center, and the Abyss on the outer edge. Linked planes would be of opposite elements. However, it is impossible to reach the outer plane of an element without first traversing the inner plane of that element. For example, no one can reach Celestia without travelling through the material, as the material is the lesser good plane. As an added bonus, this would allow DMs to focus the main part of their campaign on a different struggle, earth VS air, or whatever, if they didn't mind running the campaign on a different set of planes.

What do people think of this?