PDA

View Full Version : Cleric of Atheism



oxinabox
2010-02-06, 10:24 PM
So I had this idea: a Cleric of Atheism.

He may or maynot beleive in the existance of gods (in this case he will likely be proved wrong midcampaign),
He does however deny them his worship,
wether they need worship or not.
He may believe gods exist and have power, but that there power only comes from having worshiper, thus they arn't derseving of worship.
he proably believes his spells come for observation of rituals - cheats/Hack's for the World.
he may beleive that divine magic is just another kind of arcane magic,
what ever

so i need to create some domains for him.
Aethism, Aethism (alt), Agnostic, Skeptic.
and domain granted powers for them.

he's some idea for the powers:
Aethism: Question Beliefs (ex): expend 1 turning attempt as a fullround action, select 1 target, If that target is a divine caster, who's spells are granted by a God, then the next time he apempts to cast, that spell will have a 50% chance of failure as the target has a moment of doubt.
He may do this upto his charisma modifier times perday.
This is a Speach based ability.

Aethism (alt): Hidden from Gods eyes (su): the cleric can not be directly detected by any being of Divine Rank 1 or greater (this include sight, scent, listen, any form of scrying, but does not include sending a servent (or divine rank 0 or - ) to investigate.) this can not be negated with see invisbility or even true sight.
By spending a turning attempt/minute he may extend that around himself to a radius of equal to his cleric lvl, to affect an willing beings.

this sounds really powerful put actualy isn't gods don't deal with mortals directly much, and even if the mortals have come to confront the god in there own domains then the god is sournded by sevants, who can direct his strikes

for the rest i dont know.
skepticism is proablly some sort of dispel, or supress, maybe concentration based duration

Mongoose87
2010-02-06, 10:27 PM
You might want to check out the Athar from the Planescape setting, they could help you flesh out this theme.

CTLC
2010-02-06, 10:28 PM
i feel he should be very able to reverse other effects. he doesnt believe in god. but elementals are very real, as are fiends, dragons, demons, so maybe he can have spells similar to those?
maybe he doesnt believe in them because he has an inherent ability to cancel them out. like the outlands, so his powers could be about cutting divine casters off from their power. annnd, you already have something like that. but run with it!

Godskook
2010-02-06, 10:30 PM
Ok, what part of oxymoron don't you understand? Cause 'divine caster that doesn't believe in divine beings' pretty much sums it up. If you adjust it just far enough that it isn't an oxymoron, then you've got the ur-priest's flavor.

Grumman
2010-02-06, 10:32 PM
If I was DM, I'd say no. Play a sorcerer that thinks of himself as a "cleric of atheism" if you like, or an Ur-Priest that takes the gods' gifts anyway, but the rituals you speak of only can act as hacks if you've got the power to back them up.

Yuki Akuma
2010-02-06, 10:32 PM
Ok, what part of oxymoron don't you understand? Cause 'divine caster that doesn't believe in divine beings' pretty much sums it up. If you adjust it just far enough that it isn't an oxymoron, then you've got the ur-priest's flavor.

Divine casters don't have to believe in divine beings. Clerics can be clerics of ideals, Paladins default to serving Goodness itself, Druids and Rangers worship nature...

Favored Souls don't have to believe anything - their magic is innate to themselves like Sorcerers. Spirit Shamans bargain with spirits and don't worship them. Shugenja learn their magic in schools like Wizards do.

JaronK
2010-02-06, 10:34 PM
I played a Atheist Cleric once. He used himself as proof that the gods were fakes, just big beings that fed on worship but didn't actually have the powers they claimed to have. After all, he had the same Cleric spells as any other Cleric, despite not worshipping anyone, so clearly the worship wasn't related to the powers.

Anyway, such a Cleric doesn't really need special domains... most domains could fit in some way.

JaronK

Rasman
2010-02-06, 10:35 PM
wouldn't a "Cleric of Atheism" have to be a commoner or something...he can't exactly be a Cleric without a god...

...my head hurts from trying to find a way to rationalize this...

EDIT: Jaron...my head hurts a little less now...thnx...

Yuki Akuma
2010-02-06, 10:36 PM
wouldn't a "Cleric of Atheism" have to be a commoner or something...he can't exactly be a Cleric without a god...

Yes he can. It's outlined quite clearly in the PHB, right there with the class description.

I don't know why everyone has so much trouble with this. There's only one setting where Clerics must worship a god, and it's not even the default setting!

Tanuki Tales
2010-02-06, 10:40 PM
Is Atheism even the right term for this concept?

The Gods clearly do exist in most DnD settings, even if you don't want to classify them as being omnipotent figures.

They fit the definition for the term "God".


2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship

The "Gods" clearly have more than natural attributes and even if your setting doesn't have them requiring veneration to survive or keep power they do receive it from a good chunk of the populace of the setting.

KellKheraptis
2010-02-06, 10:42 PM
Yes he can. It's outlined quite clearly in the PHB, right there with the class description.

I don't know why everyone has so much trouble with this. There's only one setting where Clerics must worship a god, and it's not even the default setting!

Actually, even in FR, it is still possible to draw power from something other than a deity or nothing at all. You're only boned when you die and become part of the Wall.

Yuki Akuma
2010-02-06, 10:43 PM
It is in fact the best term for it - he is very much not a theist.

Rasman
2010-02-06, 10:43 PM
Yes he can. It's outlined quite clearly in the PHB, right there with the class description.

I don't know why everyone has so much trouble with this. There's only one setting where Clerics must worship a god, and it's not even the default setting!

eh...it really just sounds like a weird bard to me, imo

drengnikrafe
2010-02-06, 10:51 PM
Isn't there a very poorly built prestige class based on someone denying the existance of gods, that makes you partially resistant to some divine powers? I don't remember it well, but I think it was "down two tiers", and... started with a "d"?

Anyway, I kind of fail to understand the point. As some people here have said, divine casters can worship things other than gods. That's no problem. This particular cleric seems to be worshiping the lack of gods, rather than some other concept. How can he possibly gain powers from doubt? I'm actually really curious, now, how that can be justified with fluff.

Hallavast
2010-02-06, 10:53 PM
wouldn't a "Cleric of Atheism" have to be a commoner or something...he can't exactly be a Cleric without a god...

...my head hurts from trying to find a way to rationalize this...



I suppose it would be rather interesting to model a commoner or expert NPC as a "false priest" kind of deal. Someone with no real power but rather serves as a historian or a snakeoil salesman or a crazy guy who "miraculously heals" the gullible or makes up stuff "proving" the nonexistence of Gods...

Skills that might be useful:

Bluff
Sense Motive
Knowledge Religion/history
Knowledge Nature
Heal
Perform (oratory)
Profession (crazy guy)
Craft (holy symbols)
Hide
Move silently

Feats: Run, Dodge, Skill focus

Lord of Syntax
2010-02-06, 10:55 PM
Brave brave Sir Roland, bravely locked this violating thread, when IRL religion turned its ugly head...

Kylarra
2010-02-06, 11:00 PM
Isn't there a very poorly built prestige class based on someone denying the existance of gods, that makes you partially resistant to some divine powers? I don't remember it well, but I think it was "down two tiers", and... started with a "d"?
The Defiant, from the Planar Handbook.

Roc Ness
2010-02-06, 11:02 PM
Couldn't you make your cleric the butt end of a cruel god's joke? As in, he believes in no god and tries to prove that by casting spells that others have to worship gods for, when in actual fact he is being unknowingly "force fed" spells by some diety who is rolling on the floor and writhing with laughter.

lsfreak
2010-02-06, 11:08 PM
eh...it really just sounds like a weird bard to me, imo

Try and keep fluff and mechanics divorced as much as possible. This solves a lot of issues and opens up a lot more possibilities. There's no reason why a a cleric couldn't think that his powers are not divine but instead sourced from, say, his empathy for others, or simply inner strength that lends itself to combat prowess.

Cleric of atheism - no problem with it, though atheism itself seems a bit like a weird ideal to hold to. Rather, I'd think a cleric that didn't believe in gods would have a different ideal they are looking towards - humanitarianism, or <relevantly fluffed alignment>, or the like. They might be atheist, but that's secondary to their primary purpose.

icastflare!
2010-02-06, 11:11 PM
One Of my players had the idea. We just referenced futurama and said he worshiped " the all powerful Atheismmo"

Tanuki Tales
2010-02-06, 11:11 PM
It is in fact the best term for it - he is very much not a theist.

But Atheism still revolves around the belief that no form of a God exists.

Even if a character full heartedly believes that the "Gods" are not the the guiding force that a God should be, that doesn't stop some form of a god existing. He may not recognize them as a god he would worship or as them as anything more then the powerful creatures from morally aligned planes that are unbelievably powerful and gain veneration, but that doesn't make him an Atheist unless he's incredibly stubborn or stupid.

A Cleric of Pelor can clearly point out that there is a being who exists on another plane who not only:

A. Takes their worshiper's souls upon death

and

B. Has power beyond most recognition

but also,

C. This is the entity that his/her religion worships as its god.

Mikeavelli
2010-02-06, 11:29 PM
Another point for looking into the Athar from the Planescape setting.

They wholeheartedly believe that the gods ("Powers" is what they call them) actually exist, and are legitimately powerful beings to be respected, but call them out on numerous points:

- The "Gods" of most D&D settings can be killed, whether by force, or simply lack of worshipers.

- While powerful, they are not omnipotent, as the word "god" would seem to suggest.

- There are many other immensely powerful beings out there that are explicitly NOT gods.

- It's questionable how much the powers are legitimately interested in helping their "creations" - and how much the powers are just self-centered jerkasses. This includes the "good" powers.

- The Athar doubt whether or not the powers actually created the Multiverse at all, and believe the powers just found it here, and started telling folks that they're the creators simply because no-one else has a long enough memory to call them on it.

- Some Athar do worship an unnamed, unknowable creator thing, explicitly the "gods" they claim the powers aren't. They don't know what it IS, but it seems to be granting their clerics spells.

- I remember reading fluff somewhere that a Demon Prince was granting spells to the Athar, for ****s and giggles. No idea on the canonicity of that one.

Defiant
2010-02-06, 11:38 PM
The Defiant, from the Planar Handbook.

Someone call my name?

Raendyn
2010-02-06, 11:44 PM
Aethism (alt): Hidden from Gods eyes (su): the cleric can not be directly detected by any being of Divine Rank 1 or greater (this include sight, scent, listen, any form of scrying, but does not include sending a servent (or divine rank 0 or - ) to investigate.) this can not be negated with see invisbility or even true sight.
By spending a turning attempt/minute he may extend that around himself to a radius of equal to his cleric lvl, to affect an willing beings.



change this domain's name to "dissbelief" make domain power shelf spell resistance to divine spells.Or maybe a buff that gives divine spell resistance or absorption for divine spell lvls.If i had this buff at my hand it yould cost me few turn-attempts i suppose.

Give him a smaller spell list.Might stick with your concept.
-Based on that,you can stick class abilities,he gets bonus on other clerics?Maybe they get on him?Maybe both!
-Mabe this bonuses/penalties can apply for paladins or few more "loyal to the divine" classes?
-MAybe create a friking AMF for divine spells only?(ok i stop here!)

Class ability smite *something*,(Whats the opposite of infidel?)-i am just joking here:smallbiggrin:

Nice concept though,i'll thing of it & re-reply when i feel ready for matured answer! :smallcool:

oxinabox
2010-02-06, 11:49 PM
There's no reason why a a cleric couldn't think that his powers are not divine but instead sourced from, say, his empathy for others, or simply inner strength that lends itself to combat prowess.
.


I like this idea.
THe Important differntiating factor of a Cleric of Aethism, as compaired to a cleric who worships an Ideal, is that he opposes the worship of gods.
Then again you could very correctly say that he worships the Ideal of Aethism




They fit the definition for the term "God".

Quote:
2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship
It is setting dependant as to wether gods require human worship.
The default is that they do not.

EDIT:
I see you know that... apparently i fail at reading and quoting :smallredface:


The "Gods" clearly have more than natural attributes and even if your setting doesn't have them requiring veneration to survive or keep power they do receive it from a good chunk of the populace of the setting.

There is the pratchettian idea that:
"either the gods need worship to have power, thus there is no reason to worship them, since if we stop they will ahve no power over us.
or they don't need worship to have power, in wich case they shouldn't care if we worship them or not"


change this domain's name to "dissbelief" make domain power shelf spell resistance to divine spells.Or maybe a buff that gives divine spell resistance or absorption for divine spell lvls.If i had this buff at my hand it yould cost me few turn-attempts i suppose.

Give him a smaller spell list.Might stick with your concept.
-Based on that,you can stick class abilities,he gets bonus on other clerics?Maybe they get on him?Maybe both!
-Mabe this bonuses/penalties can apply for paladins or few more "loyal to the divine" classes?
-MAybe create a friking AMF for divine spells only?(ok i stop here!)

Class ability smite *something*,(Whats the opposite of infidel?)-i am just joking here:smallbiggrin:

Nice concept though,i'll thing of it & re-reply when i feel ready for matured answer! :smallcool:
I was thinking about this before,
Maybe a domain that instead of granting spells,m and a domain spell slot,
It grants an increasing risistance to divine spells
as spell resistance,
Maybe spell resistance equal to you lvl in the class that grants the domain.
(IIRC Saint's (or is it a differnt template.... maybe a dragon one?) spell resistance is equal to there HD)

Mewtarthio
2010-02-06, 11:49 PM
But Atheism still revolves around the belief that no form of a God exists.

Even if a character full heartedly believes that the "Gods" are not the the guiding force that a God should be, that doesn't stop some form of a god existing. He may not recognize them as a god he would worship or as them as anything more then the powerful creatures from morally aligned planes that are unbelievably powerful and gain veneration, but that doesn't make him an Atheist unless he's incredibly stubborn or stupid.

I believe the proper term is actually misotheism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misotheism)--The belief that gods may exist, but are unworthy of worship. The linked article has a ton of other related terms that may more accurately describe your character's beliefs.

Unfortunately, actually using any of those terms outside an upper-level philosophy classroom will get you some really funny looks. The term atheism works well enough if you're not doing anything official.

Pluto
2010-02-06, 11:51 PM
Another point for looking into the Athar from the Planescape setting.


Damn.
I thought I was so clever thinking of a way to reconcile these ideas.
Then I find it's already been published.

Tanuki Tales
2010-02-06, 11:53 PM
There is the pratchettian idea that:
"either the gods need worship to have power, thus there is no reason to worship them, since if we stop they will ahve no power over us.
or they don't need worship to have power, in wich case they shouldn't care if we worship them or not"

Edit: Except it's the first one ala Small Gods.

@Mew: I still think its a misnomer to use Atheism in this case.

Ormur
2010-02-07, 12:09 AM
I believe the proper term is actually misotheism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misotheism)--The belief that gods may exist, but are unworthy of worship. The linked article has a ton of other related terms that may more accurately describe your character's beliefs.

Unfortunately, actually using any of those terms outside an upper-level philosophy classroom will get you some really funny looks. The term atheism works well enough if you're not doing anything official.

I knew there had to be a term over that. I was thinking of anti-theism but that's more opposition to belief in the existence of gods rather than opposition to worship of them.

I imagine the cleric's attitude to all the gods would be similar to that of religions that acknowledge the existence other gods but oppose worship of them amongst their believers.

Unless of course the OP intends for him to be a flat earth atheist (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FlatEarthAtheist).

Ozymandias9
2010-02-07, 12:39 AM
Actually, even in FR, it is still possible to draw power from something other than a deity or nothing at all. You're only boned when you die and become part of the Wall.

Actually, I believe she was referencing Dragonlance, where one of the various 3.5 sourcebooks said all cleric had to have a patron deity on Krynn (Age or Mortals? 5th Age? I'd have to look).

The same book, however, adds as a base class a spontaneous divine caster that doesn't have a patron.

The Rose Dragon
2010-02-07, 06:30 AM
Favored Souls don't have to believe anything - their magic is innate to themselves like Sorcerers.

Except there are no Favored Souls of an ideal - their powers must come from a deity. So, yes, Favored Souls have to believe something to get powers. The "Religion" part in their description is pretty clear about this.

EDIT: Also, in Forgotten Realms, at least in 3rd Edition, divine spellcasters have to worship a deity. It can even be a dead deity, with a special feat, but there are no clerics of a cause.

Iceforge
2010-02-07, 07:52 AM
The mis-usage of the word Atheism in this post hurts my head

Raendyn
2010-02-07, 08:00 AM
Guys,honestly i dont think that discussing insightly & phylosophically about the backround & the flavor of the atheism concept leads anyware.
Our friend here came up with that idea,so he'll have him running in a while, no matte what.
Blah blah about favpored souls & deities rly dont help.

Add your opinion about class skills/abilities/domains/domain powers/spells
& its cool.

Btw i still proposse divine spell resistance.it sticks to the concept.
"I don't believe in the potency of your powers,Noone special gave them to you.they have no power over me!!"

Add a class ability where you smite cleric whose deities are opposed allignment to yours.
e.g. good cleric "You freacking animal.pawn of an blasphemus playing-god creature,take that,(cracks his head with unspeackable power)"

is this a core class?if not iron will feat could stick to him as well(as prerequirment),about the god-refusal even though EVERYONE around him believes.

He could also have an allignment restriction?In my head it sounds prett[y well.Dissbelief in the religion could easily stick with dissbelief in the order =anarchism==>chaotic??
If yes you can change my above-mentioned propose for iron will to==>Chaotic mind(psioniccs handbook,general feat)

Add his many spell resistance spells.

Dunno if i helped,maybe i'll come up with something lateryour idea still lurks in my mind :smallbiggrin:

AstralFire
2010-02-07, 09:11 AM
Yes he can. It's outlined quite clearly in the PHB, right there with the class description.

I don't know why everyone has so much trouble with this. There's only one setting where Clerics must worship a god, and it's not even the default setting!

Because be honest: When you say, "Cleric" "Priest" or anything similar, is your first thought of a theistic religion or the Force?

Yuki Akuma
2010-02-07, 09:26 AM
Except there are no Favored Souls of an ideal - their powers must come from a deity. So, yes, Favored Souls have to believe something to get powers. The "Religion" part in their description is pretty clear about this.

EDIT: Also, in Forgotten Realms, at least in 3rd Edition, divine spellcasters have to worship a deity. It can even be a dead deity, with a special feat, but there are no clerics of a cause.

Favoured Souls don't have to actually be believers to keep their powers, though, do they?

Kish
2010-02-07, 09:27 AM
Because be honest: When you say, "Cleric" "Priest" or anything similar, is your first thought of a theistic religion or the Force?
When you say "cleric," my first thought is of someone in armor casting a healing spell.

The Basic edition of 0D&D didn't go into any detail about clerics worshiping anything, if I recall correctly, and in any event it didn't have details of any immortals to worship. So my first thought doesn't link clerics to any kind of religion.

shadow_archmagi
2010-02-07, 09:39 AM
Favoured Souls don't have to actually be believers to keep their powers, though, do they?

This. I'm pretty sure Favored Souls are just people and the gods were like "Yo dude I gave you some powers because I thought it would be funny."

You can be clerics of an ideal. "I am a cleric of truth! I strike down liars with otherworldly power!" is perfectly legit by raw. Why not "I am a cleric of godlessness! I strike down believers with otherworldly power!"

For bonus points, name the Cleric of Atheism Andrew Ryan

Xallace
2010-02-07, 09:40 AM
Favoured Souls don't have to actually be believers to keep their powers, though, do they?

I imagine several favored souls don't even realize that the power is theirs.

Cure spells? "Oh, what a miraculous recovery Regdar!"
Protection from Arrows? "Man, these guys are bad shots."
Flame Strike? "Nice shootin' there, Mialee!"
etc.

Yuki Akuma
2010-02-07, 11:15 AM
I imagine several favored souls don't even realize that the power is theirs.

Cure spells? "Oh, what a miraculous recovery Regdar!"
Protection from Arrows? "Man, these guys are bad shots."
Flame Strike? "Nice shootin' there, Mialee!"
etc.

Or they could go the other way, and think their power is entirely theirs, like a Sorcerer, rather than a gift from something else.

So, yeah. There are absolutely no divine spellcasters that require you to worship anything. Many do (it's the easiest way), but none actually have to.

So yeah. Cleric of Atheism? Perfectly fine.

Optimystik
2010-02-07, 11:37 AM
You might want to check out the Athar from the Planescape setting, they could help you flesh out this theme.


The Defiant, from the Planar Handbook.

Just chiming in, in case the OP was not aware, that these two are one and the same.

They also suck.


Anyway, I kind of fail to understand the point. As some people here have said, divine casters can worship things other than gods. That's no problem. This particular cleric seems to be worshiping the lack of gods, rather than some other concept. How can he possibly gain powers from doubt? I'm actually really curious, now, how that can be justified with fluff.

Doubt is not necessary. Your cleric can be quite certain that divine power exists independently of gods.


Except there are no Favored Souls of an ideal - their powers must come from a deity. So, yes, Favored Souls have to believe something to get powers. The "Religion" part in their description is pretty clear about this.

Yes, but as they can't Fall, there really is no consequence to them for deciding not to worship whoever gave them their powers.

fryplink
2010-02-07, 12:08 PM
i did a cleric like this once, he cast spells via his ki and traded turning attempts for some of the monk immunities (made my DM happy because i usually play as a radiant servant w/ divine meta magic cheese)

bosssmiley
2010-02-07, 12:30 PM
"I call upon all-powerful Atheismo..."
- Prof Farnsworth

(I can't believe no-one quoted this earlier)

@vv: yup.

Gensh
2010-02-07, 12:35 PM
In the usual system, though, belief is power, and power doesn't simply go away. Even the negative belief of atheism is still belief, so it has to go somewhere. That's where it can get fun: where does the power go vs. where does the cleric in question think he gets his spells from. My two versions are usually either that the cleric's conviction makes him a very minor god, or else disbelieving in the gods incidentally counts as belief in the god of atheism, who also doesn't believe in himself and is frequently employed as an exotic dancer. Tons of fun for everyone! "Wait, what?! That stripper just cast miracle?!"

Optimystik
2010-02-07, 12:37 PM
"I call upon all-powerful Atheismo..."
- Prof Farnsworth

(I can't believe no-one quoted this earlier)

You must have missed this post then:


One Of my players had the idea. We just referenced futurama and said he worshiped " the all powerful Atheismmo"

LurkerInPlayground
2010-02-07, 12:39 PM
In the usual system, though, belief is power, and power doesn't simply go away. Even the negative belief of atheism is still belief, so it has to go somewhere. That's where it can get fun: where does the power go vs. where does the cleric in question think he gets his spells from. My two versions are usually either that the cleric's conviction makes him a very minor god, or else disbelieving in the gods incidentally counts as belief in the god of atheism, who also doesn't believe in himself and is frequently employed as an exotic dancer. Tons of fun for everyone! "Wait, what?! That stripper just cast miracle?!"
Actually, the default seems more like a professional relationship between the god and his cleric. You do what the god asks and he gives you the delicious magic.

Belief is required simply because you have to believe that this contract actually exists and works. Not because it literally powers cosmos.

If the gods are distant, aren't very active and don't give a whole lot of feedback to their own clerics, then there's little to distinguish a cleric from a wizard.

Of course, it gets fuzzy once you go to the planes or even go outright Planescape. The Astral Plane literally is powered by thought and perhaps belief, to a lesser extent. And a god that rules over his own domain can probably just make the rules function based on belief. Because they're gods.

But not everything in D&D is canon because it makes sense, but because D&D is a mishmash of ideas accumulated over the decades.

Tiki Snakes
2010-02-07, 12:42 PM
Surely the proper term for this type of thing is Ur Priest?
Admittedly, I may be missing something. :)

Aquillion
2010-02-07, 12:44 PM
This. I'm pretty sure Favored Souls are just people and the gods were like "Yo dude I gave you some powers because I thought it would be funny."
In fact, you could even hate the god who blessed you, if they're a particularly perverse deity (or if they simply decided that it benefited them to grant you that power -- say, because they expected you to use it in a specific way.)

There's plenty of room for Promethean concepts there, too. "Oh man, that guy totally hates gods! I'm going to give him a fraction of my vast power so he'll beat up my rival deities. There's no way this will ever come back to bite me in the ass."

Optimystik
2010-02-07, 12:46 PM
Surely the proper term for this type of thing is Ur Priest?
Admittedly, I may be missing something. :)

Ur-Priests are powerful, but their fluff is rather arbitrary and seems hastily tacked-on to me. In a question of flavor like this one, they are not the best choice.

For example, if you use Ur-Priests, you raise Unfortunate Implications. Are atheists evil? If they're all Ur-Priests, the answer is yes, whether that makes the slightest bit of sense or not.

Skorj
2010-02-07, 01:00 PM
On the fluff side, I've always taken Terry Pratchett's witches as great examples of various ways to play a cleric that doesn't believe in / worship / care about any particular god, filling the role that would otherwise be filled by the village cleric (healing, counciling, etc). Ordinary WIS-based divine magic.

One can be an atheist cleric without being an evangelist of the non-existance of gods, IMO. The former makes a lot more sense in a setting where the gods occasionally show up, give press releases, and sign autographs. The latter only works in a setting where proof of the existance of any gods is deliberately made elusive.

An atheist favored soul just requires a god with an ironic sense of humor.

I'm working on developing a setting where the followers of one of the gods claim that none of the other gods exist. I'm finding it pretty difficult to provide justification for both sides' beliefs, compared to a setting where there are different beliefs about the importance of various gods.

Tinydwarfman
2010-02-07, 01:03 PM
Depending on your definition of atheist, and your definition of god, it's perfectly reasonable. My Lawful neutral monk is an atheist because while he acknowledges that some quite powerful being exist, they are no more gods than your average level 20 wizard. They are imperfect beings, and deserve no worship. Do you automatically worship anyone who has a boatload of money IRL?

Also, just remember kids: If it has stats, it can be killed. Guess what so called 'Gods' have? Not very good stats.:smallamused:

LurkerInPlayground
2010-02-07, 01:06 PM
Depending on your definition of atheist, and your definition of god, it's perfectly reasonable. My Lawful neutral monk is an atheist because while he acknowledges that some quite powerful being exist, they are no more gods than your average level 20 wizard. They are imperfect beings, and deserve no worship. Do you automatically worship anyone who has a boatload of money IRL?

Also, just remember kids: If it has stats, it can be killed. Guess what so called 'Gods' have? Not very good stats.:smallamused:
Although I recall that the creature type that gods get gives them a bevy of powers that aren't listed in their entries.

These generally make them unkillable or nigh-unkillable. Especially if played intelligently. Some of these powers are little less than "I win."

Furthermore, this assumes that all DM's are the type to give gods stats. There are many that will not. Because they are gods. Fighting them is like trying to fight DM fiat. Rocks fall. Everybody dies.

LurkerInPlayground
2010-02-07, 01:09 PM
On the fluff side, I've always taken Terry Pratchett's witches as great examples of various ways to play a cleric that doesn't believe in / worship / care about any particular god, filling the role that would otherwise be filled by the village cleric (healing, counciling, etc). Ordinary WIS-based divine magic.
Druids and rangers presumably can be spun that way.

Conan-verse wizards were often priests by profession. Or priests who happened to have a few wizardly skills. Gods do literally exist in some of the stories, but whether they interact very much with their priests is unclear. In any case, most gods are little more than sufficiently advanced aliens.

Optimystik
2010-02-07, 01:24 PM
The trouble with gods isn't their stats - it's their Divine powers and Divine Salient Abilities, which are very open to interpretation. and can make the difference between an impossible encounter and a merely difficult one.

For example, how do you plan an attack on a level 50 outsider who can see the future?

Roderick_BR
2010-02-07, 04:06 PM
A "cleric" that doesn't trust gods could try being an archivist, instead, since it's sorta a divine-powered wizard. He uses his knowledge to tap into divine power through his studies like a wizard taps into the world's arcane power, without gaining power from a deity.
Other than that, a cleric that doesn't believe in some higher power (deities, concepts, ideals, nature) just.... doesn't gain powers. At all.
You could, of course, re-fluff a generic cleric as something like that. He studies something that allows him to cast magic without needing a deity to power it.

Raendyn
2010-02-07, 05:43 PM
...In sadness i figured out that an interesting thread has transformed into.Arguing about clerics & favored souls.
...I also found out that no1 actually reads the hole thread b4 posting thats why so many identical replies...


Just for the record why do you ppl try so hard to find a freaking concept for all those classes?
favored soul should NOT exist!its a freaking class WoTC found because the needed a spontaneous cleric.they had no earlier refer to them no nothing they did not even have a nice concept to support them!one they they just "flup" came up!!!.same thing happened with spirit shamans,hopefully for them they had a nice pre-made concept via books-movels to support them,in FR at least.

Am i the only guy around here with that info?i had expected like at least 3 more posts flaming favored souls.

aboyd
2010-02-07, 05:49 PM
So I had this idea: a Cleric of Atheism.

He may or maynot beleive in the existance of gods (in this case he will likely be proved wrong midcampaign),
He does however deny them his worship,
wether they need worship or not.
He may believe gods exist and have power, but that there power only comes from having worshiper, thus they arn't derseving of worship.
I just wanted to point out that I believe this is the known, stated reason for gods having power. So accusing a god of gaining power from his worshippers would really be no accusation at all. The god would probably respond, "DUH."

I suspect the quickest way to get yourself killed in a game would be to preach to people to stop worshipping. The gods would freak and kill you right quick before you had enough power to truly weaken them.

Yuki Akuma
2010-02-07, 06:08 PM
...In sadness i figured out that an interesting thread has transformed into.Arguing about clerics & favored souls.
...I also found out that no1 actually reads the hole thread b4 posting thats why so many identical replies...


Just for the record why do you ppl try so hard to find a freaking concept for all those classes?
favored soul should NOT exist!its a freaking class WoTC found because the needed a spontaneous cleric.they had no earlier refer to them no nothing they did not even have a nice concept to support them!one they they just "flup" came up!!!.same thing happened with spirit shamans,hopefully for them they had a nice pre-made concept via books-movels to support them,in FR at least.

Am i the only guy around here with that info?i had expected like at least 3 more posts flaming favored souls.

I have no idea what you're saying. Are you complaining that there were no Favoured Souls in the setting material until Wizards made them up?

...Well duh. There were no Sorcerers until 3e, either.

Godskook
2010-02-07, 06:11 PM
So, yeah. There are absolutely no divine spellcasters that require you to worship anything. Many do (it's the easiest way), but none actually have to.

Actually, in Complete Divine, Favored Souls are specifically required to select a patron deity, saying that they're 'unlike clerics' who can select ideals.

Yuki Akuma
2010-02-07, 06:14 PM
Actually, in Complete Divine, Favored Souls are specifically required to select a patron deity, saying that they're 'unlike clerics' who can select ideals.

And they also don't have an "ex-favoured souls" entry, unlike Clerics, meaning they can go change their faith and keep their powers just fine.

Starbuck_II
2010-02-07, 06:24 PM
Exactly, Good Pelor might have chosen you but you can worship the other Pelor, god of Sun burns.

FS are great that way.

Tinydwarfman
2010-02-07, 06:27 PM
Although I recall that the creature type that gods get gives them a bevy of powers that aren't listed in their entries.

These generally make them unkillable or nigh-unkillable. Especially if played intelligently. Some of these powers are little less than "I win."

Furthermore, this assumes that all DM's are the type to give gods stats. There are many that will not. Because they are gods. Fighting them is like trying to fight DM fiat. Rocks fall. Everybody dies.

Chill guys, I was just joking. There are ways to do it though, just check out the WOTC CharOP boards for some of the anti-punpuns. (woudn't work for all gods)

Nero24200
2010-02-07, 06:28 PM
Sorry, but a "Cleric of Atheism" strikes me as something that shouldn't exist. Even if you find a way, I as a DM personally wouldn't allow it, since, at the very least, it wouldn't be in the spirit of the class. It would be like playing a pacifist fighter or a wizard who doesn't beleive in magic.

Not only is the idea impractical to pull off in a game (since a cleric with no faith has no spells) it doesn't fit the class theme at all. A spellcaster who doesn't beleive in the gods could easily get his/her powers elsewhere (such as inheritly (sorcerer), by studying (wizard), by pact-making (binder or possibly warlock)). There isn't exactly a shortage of magic sources.

Now, someone who steals power form the gods or finds another way, fair enough, but expecting diety's to grant you spells even though you question their existance?

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-07, 06:30 PM
...In sadness i figured out that an interesting thread has transformed into.Arguing about clerics & favored souls.
What? Transformed?

The original post had two parts. The first part detailed the philosophical workings of an a-theist cleric, which has been discussed in large part. The second part asked for specialized a-theist domains. This is IMO unnecessarily focused - and if specialized a-theist powers are needed so badly, there is a Defiant prestige class for that.

Looking at the dozen posts before yours, only two of them even mention favored souls. I wouldn't say either of those are argumentative. It is good that you read the hole thread b4 posting, but it might be wise to look more closely at it.


On-topic:
One homebrew campaign setting I helped collaborate on had a vaguely misotheistic deity. He would most likely grant misotheists/atheists spells, given that he grants them a peaceful afterlife.
Even if a cleric is not devoted to atheism, per se, he can certainly be non-religious. Eberron had some Clerics of Patriotism IIRC (emphasis on the "if")

Yuki Akuma
2010-02-07, 06:37 PM
Sorry, but a "Cleric of Atheism" strikes me as something that shouldn't exist. Even if you find a way, I as a DM personally wouldn't allow it, since, at the very least, it wouldn't be in the spirit of the class. It would be like playing a pacifist fighter or a wizard who doesn't beleive in magic.

What's wrong with a pacifist Fighter?

olentu
2010-02-07, 06:41 PM
Sorry, but a "Cleric of Atheism" strikes me as something that shouldn't exist. Even if you find a way, I as a DM personally wouldn't allow it, since, at the very least, it wouldn't be in the spirit of the class. It would be like playing a pacifist fighter or a wizard who doesn't beleive in magic.

Not only is the idea impractical to pull off in a game (since a cleric with no faith has no spells) it doesn't fit the class theme at all. A spellcaster who doesn't beleive in the gods could easily get his/her powers elsewhere (such as inheritly (sorcerer), by studying (wizard), by pact-making (binder or possibly warlock)). There isn't exactly a shortage of magic sources.

Now, someone who steals power form the gods or finds another way, fair enough, but expecting diety's to grant you spells even though you question their existance?

I would say that except in those settings where the gods are remote, such as eberron I believe, someone who does not believe in the gods might have more faith then one who believes in the observable gods.

MickJay
2010-02-07, 08:51 PM
What's wrong with a pacifist Fighter?

Nothing wrong with playing a wizard who doesn't believe in magic, either. He'll have his rationalizations about how magic works, or a different idea of what magic is, perhaps he'll be reluctant to use his spells, or maybe he'll simply hate magic, but will keep using it anyway, for the benefit of others. Perhaps his ultimate goal is the destruction of magic as it is (a'la Kreia from KotOR2, for example).

lsfreak
2010-02-07, 08:55 PM
-snip-

Once again: divorce mechanics from fluff. Mechanics-wise, the only thing that determines a cleric's power is whether they prefer healing or harming (spontaneous casting), what they like to do (domains), and that they spend an hour praying, meditating, or twiddling their thumbs every day. There is absolutely nothing in the class mechanics that stipulate they must get their power from gods.

So let them get powers from another source. They are wholly cleric, but refluffed into something interesting and unique. Get it from a strong sense of empathy or strong desire for revenge, the ability to meditate and effect the outside world, or merely the ability to do ****ing awesome things for no apparent reason. Saying to go to another class because there's already a lot of ways to get magic is a cop-out that ultimately limits the game. An atheistic cleric is perfectly acceptable and a lot more imaginative and interesting than going, say, archivist.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-07, 09:02 PM
An atheistic cleric is perfectly acceptable and a lot more imaginative and interesting than going, say, archivist.

Really? You find cleric more imaginative and interesting than archivist? The former class is pretty dull. So is the latter, but I really wouldn't say one is more imaginative than the other.

Yuki Akuma
2010-02-07, 09:08 PM
Really? You find cleric more imaginative and interesting than archivist? The former class is pretty dull. So is the latter, but I really wouldn't say one is more imaginative than the other.

Playing an atheist Cleric is more interesting and unique than just going Archivist.

lsfreak
2010-02-07, 09:09 PM
Really? You find cleric more imaginative and interesting than archivist? The former class is pretty dull. So is the latter, but I really wouldn't say one is more imaginative than the other.

No, clerics are pretty boring and dull. The fluff is poor and the mechanics are so-so. Archivists are a little better, but they're no binder. [EDIT: Clarification to prevent zomgclericsareawesome: I'm talking from a creativity/imagination standpoint. Yes they're great power-wise, but the mechanics is just more Vancian casting]

But an atheistic cleric, where atheism is not just written somewhere on the character sheet but something fundamental to the character? Yes, that's a hell of a lot better than either a run-of-the-mill cleric or an archivist.

Grumman
2010-02-07, 10:21 PM
For example, if you use Ur-Priests, you raise Unfortunate Implications. Are atheists evil? If they're all Ur-Priests, the answer is yes, whether that makes the slightest bit of sense or not.
No, it doesn't. Atheism doesn't make you evil, stealing power from the gods makes you evil.

Rappy
2010-02-07, 10:43 PM
Ignoring the question of whether or not an atheist Cleric is feasible or not and going back to the baseline suggested additions, I imagine you're on the right path with Question Beliefs, but perhaps up it to simply having Dispel Magic against divine spellcasters as a SLA a certain number of times a day.

Hidden From Gods' Eyes....eh. It's not really that useful unless you have deities as an active force in your campaign.

I imagine it might be helpful to produce Skepticism as a cumulative bonus to saves against mind-affecting abilities, or perhaps simply a bonus to Will saves if you wish.

erikun
2010-02-07, 10:54 PM
To OP: What do you mean by atheism?

The way I see it, there are two obvious definitions. One is that the character doesn't believe that deities exist. In this case, they are simply misinformed, just as someone who doesn't believe dragons exist is misinformed. They may change their viewpoints upon obtaining proof, or they may try to rationalize it ("It's just a mutant firebreathing dinosaur!"), but it doesn't change the fact that they simply believe something that is false. Or is true, in some campaigns - remember that clerics can get their powers from believe, even if the gods don't exist.

The other is that the character believes deities exist, but does not believe they are gods. Doing so would need to define what they mean by "god", as there are lots of things in the D&D world which are simply supernatural or greater-than-human. Perhaps they think that deities are simply powerful beings, or really celestials and demons, or even concepts given form from worship similar to elementals.

--

As for the mechanics of an atheist cleric, that is simple. An atheist priest would be a bit harder to rationalize, but the cleric (class) is an easy matter.

The cleric could be "sponsored" by a deity, given spells without their premission. You'll likely see the trickster deity (for the joke) or knowledge deity (to promote examination of beliefs) doing this, although nothing stops other deities from doing the same.

The cleric could be worshipping some dogma that doesn't really concern the gods. Tharizdun, for example, simply wants to destroy all of reality, and little things like "What is a god?" are minor concerns.

The cleric could be promoting an ideal, granting them powers without worship or deity. Knowledge and Destruction would make the most sense for an active atheist - for knowing the truth and bringing down the "false idols" - but any atheist could devote themselves to any ideal. There's nothing stopping an atheist cleric from taking the Healing and Protection domains, and safeguarding their town from orc attacks.

The "cleric" could be a similar yet unrelated class. Druids, paladins, bards, warlocks, and ardents can all be "clerics" or clericlike classes.

The cleric could worship a deity, while fully believing that the deity is not a god. A cleric doesn't need to think of Pelor as all-powerful to consider worshipping him for healing powers to be a good thing.

The cleric could be an Athar/Ur-Priest, believing the deities exist but are not gods and not worthy of worship.

You could make a Domain of Atheism. I would think that the given power would prevent the cleric from turning/rebuking undead, instead allowing the cleric to spend turn attempts for counterspelling. (For simplicity, just allow the counterspelling of all magic, rather than specifically divine magic.) I'm not sure what spells you would include in the Atheist Domain, though.

For that matter, in an utter twist of irony, you could have a Deity of Atheism. Such a deity could insist that the deities are simply powerful but otherwise normal beings, it could intentionally be trying to weaken the other deities to strengthen itself, or it could just be a deity of skepticism. After all, the gods work in mysterious ways.

Finally, you could technically have a cleric of Ao/God/other monotheist belief. Such a cleric would believe that the deities are false gods, or are just components of the actual God. They would technically be atheist - not believing in the existing deities - although perhaps not what you had intended by an "atheist cleric."

LurkerInPlayground
2010-02-07, 11:01 PM
Seriously though, the OP is like presenting a tongue-in-cheek Terry Pratchett version of the atheist. The stereotypical person who denies the existence of the gods based on sheer faith (irony).

Or on a less comedic tone, perhaps a Nay-Theist (which is not an atheist). Somebody who believes that gods exist, but doesn't believe that they are worthy of worship.

I believe this was one of the plot points of NWN2. Something about how being stuck in the Wall of the Faithless was overly cruel and inhumane merely because a person refused to dedicate his life to the service of a god.

A Nay-theist can be a good protagonist in a Rage Against The Machine type of story.

erikun is also missing out on another obvious possibility. Gods might not be very active in the setting, to the point that there is a reasonable doubt that they exist at all, with little to actually to distinguish a cleric from a wizard aside from the obviously different magics which are hard-coded into the game rules.

Another possibility is that a person might have a belief in one god and may disbelieve all others. Which makes that person an atheist with regard to those other gods. This may be possible if it is also possible be considered a god without wanting to grant cleric spells to a legion of worshipers. Doubly so, if communication and travel is so primitive as to make the spread of information rather difficult.

It is also equally possible that a god is interested in brainwashing his followers into believing that he is The One True God. Which, again, means that these followers are atheistic with respect to all gods but their own.

Also, stop this postmodern nonsense about the "Power of Belief." It's hackneyed and overdone. Planescape: Torment did it. Mage: The Ascension did it. And as far as I know, the latter fell into over-embellished mess of canon. And it raises questions that never gets addressed because it has got its head up its pretentious ass.

(If the human will can cause things on a metaphysical level what causes the human will? If reality is the Consensus of belief, then why do things like other realms and Lovecraftian powers exist? It's not like the average person even knows or believes in these things. Doesn't this imply that the so-called Consensus may actually be more immutable than believed? Doesn't this just reduce the problem to a chicken-and-egg logic trap? If reality is merely a matter of popular opinion, why are some superstitions untrue? It's not like the average person even has that much scientific literacy. Yadda. Yadda.)

erikun
2010-02-07, 11:25 PM
erikun is also missing out on another obvious possibility. Gods might not be very active in the setting, to the point that there is a reasonable doubt that they exist at all, with little to actually to distinguish a cleric from a wizard aside from the obviously different magics which are hard-coded into the game rules.
A good comparison are the dragons in the Dragonlance campaign setting are a good example. Nobody has seen a dragon in hundreds (thousands?) of years. Even the oldest living being has only heard tales from their grandparents. There are no living examples, no dead bodies, no dragon hoards. Simply put, there is no proof that dragons exist, or ever have existed, outside myths and legends. Someone in Dragonlance who thinks that dragons are not real does have a good reason for thinking that way.

However, dragons do exist in the Dragonlance setting, so while a character has good reason to disbelieve them, they are still going to be around.

Of course, there's nothing stopping a Dragonlance DM from deciding that dragons really are just myth and legend, too.


Also, stop this postmodern nonsense about the "Power of Belief."
But aren't D&D deities powered by belief? The ones with more worshippers are stronger, the ones with less worshippers are weaker. Killing all the worshippers kills the deity, and getting more worshippers makes the deity stronger. That's why Asmodeus is the head devil in D&D - he has stolen tons of souls to make himself stronger.

I don't know if this is relevant to any postmodern beliefs, but just as a character disbelieving in deities doens't make them not exist, a character disbelieving in the power of worship doesn't mean that worship doesn't have any power, at least in D&Dland.


[EDIT] "A good comparison are the dragons in the Dragonlance campaign setting are a good example"? I think I should stop posting for the day.

LurkerInPlayground
2010-02-07, 11:29 PM
I don't know if this is relevant to any postmodern beliefs, but just as a character disbelieving in deities doens't make them not exist, a character disbelieving in the power of worship doesn't mean that worship doesn't have any power, at least in D&Dland.
Fair enough. But you're treading the line when Faith in Atheism literally stops other gods from working.

*ugh* That gives me two headaches in one.

Coidzor
2010-02-08, 02:33 AM
I think it would more likely be a cleric of misotheism than atheism.

And whether the gods are worshipper dependent or not varies by the setting, actually.

In Greyhawk, I believe, they weren't. In Faerun they kind of were, but it was more that they had to actually do their jobs than keep such and such number of worshippers, might be misremembering that one slightly.

In Eberron it's a question as to whether there are any deities at all. and that's about it for 3.5 dnd.

oxinabox
2010-02-08, 08:15 AM
Sorry, but a "Cleric of Atheism" strikes me as something that shouldn't exist. Even if you find a way, I as a DM personally wouldn't allow it, since, at the very least, it wouldn't be in the spirit of the class. It would be like playing a pacifist fighter or a wizard who doesn't beleive in magic.

Please see: The DM Don't Get it (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=140822)
it's one of the "Hottest" threads i've ever seen (meaning massive , post count in a short amount of time - i looked at it the other day - 2 pages, i looked at it yesterday moring 10 pages)

Apparently the playground consensus on DM's Banning things because they arn't in the 'spirit of the class.' is that is is a bad thing.

Clerics of Aethism are clearly supported in the rules:

Some clerics devote themselves not to a god but to a cause...
Clearly Aethism is a cause - to convice people not to worship god.
though this is not the only legit interpitation of a aethism cleric.

*There is the Gods exist but arn't worthy of worship.
*Gods exist, and maybe worthy of worship, but not mine.
*Gods are lies and fraudsters, they exist, but chances are they are just a beguiler (epic lvl or otherwise).
*Gods don;'t exist, they are just focus for churchs to use to make money/control people, and are used in as similar matter by those lying scheming celestials.
*Gods don't exist (Easy in many many settings)
*Magic doesn't exist (very hard in some settings), it can all be explained by science.

Optimystik
2010-02-08, 08:24 AM
No, it doesn't. Atheism doesn't make you evil, stealing power from the gods makes you evil.

Relax, I wasn't saying Atheism was evil. Just that arguably, any attempt to acquire divine power without going through a deity counts for this purpose.

And in any case, stealing divine power from EVIL gods should not automatically be an Evil act. First, it doesn't take into account what you do with that power ("With my mighty magic, I will now extinguish that burning orphanage!")... it also has the potential to deprive Evil clerics and creatures of their powers, reducing their capacity to do harm to innocents.

paddyfool
2010-02-08, 08:33 AM
*There is the Gods exist but arn't worthy of worship.
*Gods exist, and maybe worthy of worship, but not mine.
*Gods are lies and fraudsters, they exist, but chances are they are just a beguiler (epic lvl or otherwise).

The first two are varying degrees of misotheism rather than atheism, with the third being a borderline case.



*Gods don;'t exist, they are just focus for churchs to use to make money/control people, and are used in as similar matter by those lying scheming celestials.

Now this one I actually like. The cleric's cause might then be to reveal this "truth" he believes in to the world at large, and free people from their delusions, or somesuch.



*Gods don't exist (Easy in many many settings)


Well, Eberron certainly. Not that many others that I know, however.



*Magic doesn't exist (very hard in some settings), it can all be explained by science.

"Gods and magic have rational explanations" would again invoke the "So?" response. Your typical D&D setting is not the real world, and "magic" occupies a very different place in it (although I don't want to discuss the details of this, for fear of forum rules).

Iceforge
2010-02-08, 08:39 AM
Please see: The DM Don't Get it (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=140822)
it's one of the "Hottest" threads i've ever seen (meaning massive , post count in a short amount of time - i looked at it the other day - 2 pages, i looked at it yesterday moring 10 pages)

Apparently the playground consensus on DM's Banning things because they arn't in the 'spirit of the class.' is that is is a bad thing.

Clerics of Aethism are clearly supported in the rules:

Clearly Aethism is a cause - to convice people not to worship god.
though this is not the only legit interpitation of a aethism cleric.

*There is the Gods exist but arn't worthy of worship.
*Gods exist, and maybe worthy of worship, but not mine.
*Gods are lies and fraudsters, they exist, but chances are they are just a beguiler (epic lvl or otherwise).
*Gods don;'t exist, they are just focus for churchs to use to make money/control people, and are used in as similar matter by those lying scheming celestials.
*Gods don't exist (Easy in many many settings)
*Magic doesn't exist (very hard in some settings), it can all be explained by science.

Now this has gone on long enough.

Even taking the consensus that you are refering to, you are still in error, as atheism is not a cause.
Spreading Atheism can be viewed as a cause, which is what you are refering to, namely convincing people that the Gods does not exist, but that is not atheism itself.

You are clearly bordering more towards Anti-theism than atheism, and I would be deeply anoyed by this idea, was it presented to me as a GM, based upon the clearly lack of understand of what the word atheism means.

"There is the Gods exist but arn't worthy of worship." Then you are not an atheist
"Gods exist, and maybe worthy of worship, but not mine." Again, with the attitude, you are NOT an atheist.
"Gods are lies and fraudsters, they exist, but chances are they are just a beguiler (epic lvl or otherwise)." This one moderately fits, but you could have better labels for it than atheism.
"Gods don;'t exist, they are just focus for churchs to use to make money/control people, and are used in as similar matter by those lying scheming celestials." Someone beliving that would qualify as an atheist, but being an atheist would not mean you belive that, so your term is quite unspecific, but that could work.
"Gods don't exist (Easy in many many settings)" We are getting close now, this is pretty much the definition of atheism
"Magic doesn't exist (very hard in some settings), it can all be explained by science" Belief and Disbelief in magic has nothing to do with atheism, althrough there is likely a corralation between people not beliving in atheism and not beliving in magic, they are not mutually exclusive or inclusive, as you can be both OR one, but not the other OR neither.

oxinabox
2010-02-08, 09:04 AM
OK, I['m going to get my defintions straight.
BTW, many of the following I think are acceptible as
being withing the scope of this thread.
others i've just put in as i found them.
But any i think are nice concepts for a cleric.



Atheism:
Noun
atheism (plural atheisms)

1. Absence of, or rejection of, belief in the existence of a god or gods.
2. The stance that a deity or deities do not exist.

Usage notes

* The term atheism may refer either to an explicit belief that God or gods do not exist (sense 2 above), or to the mere lack of an explicit belief that God or gods do exist (sense 1 above). Some speakers do not distinguish between these senses; others distinguish them by using the terms strong atheism and weak atheism (respectively), or by using atheism to mean “strong atheism” and agnosticism or nontheism to mean “weak atheism”. (Similar distinctions may be drawn for related terms, such as atheist.) The distinction between strong atheism and weak atheism tends to be made primarily by atheists themselves.



nontheism (uncountable):
1. Any of a range of concepts regarding spirituality and religion which do not include the idea of a deity in the form of a theistic God or gods.

pantheism (plural pantheisms)
1. The belief that the universe is in some sense divine and should be revered. Pantheism identifies the universe with God but denies any personality or transcendence of such a God.
2. (rare) The belief in all gods; omnitheism.


deism (plural deisms)
1. (philosophy) The belief in the existence of a god, by or through reason.
2. The belief in a god or gods who set the universe in motion, then ceased to interact with it.
3. (uncountable) The religious philosophy and movement that became prominent in England, France, and the United States in the 17th and 18th centuries that rejects supernatural events (prophecy, miracles) and divine revelation prominent in organized religion, along with holy books and revealed religions that assert the existence of such things.



misotheism (rare, obsolete)
1. Hatred of God or gods

maltheism (uncountable);
1. The belief that there is an evil God or gods.


eutheism (uncountable)
1. the belief that there is a god, and that this god is good


dystheism (uncountable)
1. The belief that there is a god, but that this god is not good, though not necessarily evil.

antitheism (uncountable)

1. The categorical opposition to the belief in any and all deities.

henotheism
1 Belief in or worship of one deity without denying the existence of other deities.
2 the worship of one deity (of several) as the special god of one's family, clan, or tribe















My dictionairy may be poor.
SOmeone with a better knowledge of philosphy/theology/dictionairy operating, could come up with a better one (please put it in code blocs so i can find it when skipping though the thread... so i can stop using the wrong words)

Iceforge
2010-02-08, 09:54 AM
OK, I['m going to get my defintions straight.
BTW, many of the following I think are acceptible as
being withing the scope of this thread.
others i've just put in as i found them.
But any i think are nice concepts for a cleric.



Atheism:
Noun
atheism (plural atheisms)

1. Absence of, or rejection of, belief in the existence of a god or gods.
2. The stance that a deity or deities do not exist.

Usage notes

* The term atheism may refer either to an explicit belief that God or gods do not exist (sense 2 above), or to the mere lack of an explicit belief that God or gods do exist (sense 1 above). Some speakers do not distinguish between these senses; others distinguish them by using the terms strong atheism and weak atheism (respectively), or by using atheism to mean “strong atheism” and agnosticism or nontheism to mean “weak atheism”. (Similar distinctions may be drawn for related terms, such as atheist.) The distinction between strong atheism and weak atheism tends to be made primarily by atheists themselves.



nontheism (uncountable):
1. Any of a range of concepts regarding spirituality and religion which do not include the idea of a deity in the form of a theistic God or gods.

pantheism (plural pantheisms)
1. The belief that the universe is in some sense divine and should be revered. Pantheism identifies the universe with God but denies any personality or transcendence of such a God.
2. (rare) The belief in all gods; omnitheism.


deism (plural deisms)
1. (philosophy) The belief in the existence of a god, by or through reason.
2. The belief in a god or gods who set the universe in motion, then ceased to interact with it.
3. (uncountable) The religious philosophy and movement that became prominent in England, France, and the United States in the 17th and 18th centuries that rejects supernatural events (prophecy, miracles) and divine revelation prominent in organized religion, along with holy books and revealed religions that assert the existence of such things.



misotheism (rare, obsolete)
1. Hatred of God or gods

maltheism (uncountable);
1. The belief that there is an evil God or gods.


eutheism (uncountable)
1. the belief that there is a god, and that this god is good


dystheism (uncountable)
1. The belief that there is a god, but that this god is not good, though not necessarily evil.

antitheism (uncountable)

1. The categorical opposition to the belief in any and all deities.

henotheism
1 Belief in or worship of one deity without denying the existence of other deities.
2 the worship of one deity (of several) as the special god of one's family, clan, or tribe















My dictionairy may be poor.
SOmeone with a better knowledge of philosphy/theology/dictionairy operating, could come up with a better one (please put it in code blocs so i can find it when skipping though the thread... so i can stop using the wrong words)

Where the hell did you get those dictionary defintions from?

I want to know, because this is fantastic; A Dictionary that got the things right and remained quite objective about it, instead of being clearly coloured by the author(s)'s own views and beliefs.

(Mainly looking at atheism which, sadly, is badly defined in many larger dictionaries due to theistic biases, but I won't discuss that further, as that moves the discussion from terminologi and into religion and that is, as far as I know, not allowed on these forums)

nightwyrm
2010-02-08, 09:59 AM
Well, that's interesting.

In a sense, most D&D PC/NPCs would be maltheists since evil gods like Vecna and Tiamat clearly exists.

oxinabox
2010-02-08, 10:11 AM
Where the hell did you get those dictionary defintions from?

I want to know, because this is fantastic; A Dictionary that got the things right and remained quite objective about it, instead of being clearly coloured by the author(s)'s own views and beliefs.

(Mainly looking at atheism which, sadly, is badly defined in many larger dictionaries due to theistic biases, but I won't discuss that further, as that moves the discussion from terminologi and into religion and that is, as far as I know, not allowed on these forums)
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic,
I got them from Wictionairy, wich i would consider suspect of being colour by the authors veiws.
with the excerption of henotheism, wich i got one defintion from Collins dictionairy and the other from some random website.

Iceforge
2010-02-08, 10:12 AM
Actually just noted the "Omnitheism" hidden under "pantheism"

How odd, I do not know if your dictionary is right there or if my understanding of omnitheism is right, as I thought omnitheism was the "one God, many paths" approach and not the "all god's exist"

Anyway, enough about that, as that term clearly doesn't really matter in the context you need a term, in which misotheism and antitheism would be the clear choises I think

Iceforge
2010-02-08, 10:15 AM
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic,
I got them from Wictionairy, wich i would consider suspect of being colour by the authors veiws.
with the excerption of henotheism, wich i got one defintion from Collins dictionairy and the other from some random website.

Nope, not being sarcastic or anything, the defintion you got on atheism is more appropriate than some of the larger ones who defines it as "denial of the existance of God", sometimes slightly rephrased, but clearly showing a subjective judgement on whatever the belief is true or not.

But I am afraid to discuss it further, because I am not sure where moderators puts the line between discussing real world religions and discussing terminologi and the reliability of various dictionaries

Nero24200
2010-02-08, 12:03 PM
Please see: The DM Don't Get it (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=140822)
it's one of the "Hottest" threads i've ever seen (meaning massive , post count in a short amount of time - i looked at it the other day - 2 pages, i looked at it yesterday moring 10 pages)

Apparently the playground consensus on DM's Banning things because they arn't in the 'spirit of the class.' is that is is a bad thing. So basically, the DM shouldn't be allowed to ban anything? I'd love to see the Pun-Pun builds used in your campaigns.

I don't consider myself a bad DM simply because I disallow conceapts that not only go against most D'n'D settings, but just seem out-right absurd to me. And quite frankly, I question the logic of anyone who would consider it bad to ban certain classes, especially ideas like this which just scream "I'm only making this to see how far I can push the DM".


Clerics of Aethism are clearly supported in the rules:

Clearly Aethism is a cause - to convice people not to worship god.
though this is not the only legit interpitation of a aethism cleric. Sorry, but I think there are limits to what may count as a "Cause" for a cleric. If you're allowed to stretch it this far, what's to stop you playing a cleric who gains his powers from just about anything?

Theoretically, what's to stop me playing a cleric of "Not liking that guy over there"? Why not? According to this strict interpretation of RAW, as long as you beleive it's a decent enough cause you can. So if I think someone over there is a real *censored* I should suddenly start gaining divine spells?

I would really like anyone who uses the "Cleric of a Cause" idea to justify this to just...sit down for a moment and think what it'll actually do. I'd start playing a cleric "of pies" if my DM told me I'd get away with something like this.

paddyfool
2010-02-08, 12:26 PM
So basically, the DM shouldn't be allowed to ban anything? I'd love to see the Pun-Pun builds used in your campaigns.

I don't consider myself a bad DM simply because I disallow conceapts that not only go against most D'n'D settings, but just seem out-right absurd to me. And quite frankly, I question the logic of anyone who would consider it bad to ban certain classes, especially ideas like this which just scream "I'm only making this to see how far I can push the DM".

He was talking about DMs banning refluff of classes being a bad thing, not the banning of mechanics. Nor was there any talk of not allowing the DM to ban things, but merely the viewpoint that banning this particular stuff is a bad idea. Especially if it isn't designed to push the DM about, but merely the idea of a character concept the player finds interesting.


Sorry, but I think there are limits to what may count as a "Cause" for a cleric. If you're allowed to stretch it this far, what's to stop you playing a cleric who gains his powers from just about anything?

Theoretically, what's to stop me playing a cleric of "Not liking that guy over there"? Why not? According to this strict interpretation of RAW, as long as you beleive it's a decent enough cause you can. So if I think someone over there is a real *censored* I should suddenly start gaining divine spells?

Hmm... I'd reckon that a Cleric of "the hatred of that bloke over there" might be a bit too specific, and suggest that they might want to be a cleric of a specific form of racism/other prejudice, or a cleric of general hatred instead. But really, strawman argument is strawman - the analogy doesn't hold. If you'd be concerned that the player might not be taking their character concept seriously enough for the tone of your game, then fine, look into that. But if they take this character concept seriously, and the game isn't in Faerun... then why not?



I would really like anyone who uses the "Cleric of a Cause" idea to justify this to just...sit down for a moment and think what it'll actually do. I'd start playing a cleric "of pies" if my DM told me I'd get away with something like this.

Some people in the real world do consider atheism a cause, even though most atheists don't all that much. Quite what sort of gods-hating outside or inner force would actually be empowering a cleric of atheism would be a whole other question, and could be woven by a skilled DM into their setting (for instance, what if the PC is actually being used as a pawn by Something Worse?)

LurkerInPlayground
2010-02-08, 12:45 PM
Some people in the real world do consider atheism a cause, even though most atheists don't all that much. Quite what sort of gods-hating outside or inner force would actually be empowering a cleric of atheism would be a whole other question, and could be woven by a skilled DM into their setting (for instance, what if the PC is actually being used as a pawn by Something Worse?)
While it's not quite as bad as a "Wizard who doesn't believe in magic" or a "Fighter that doesn't fight." It's still pretty bad. Why wouldn't the Nay-Theist just be a Wizard or a Fighter?

Firstly, the whole class is an idea based on a mis-perception that, I, as a DM, couldn't stomach.

Secondly, it ruins the whole tone of the game when you let something as stupid as a Stereotype-Atheist-That-Really-Actually-Is-A-Maltheist-Powered-By-Faith run around. It doesn't matter if you've got the Forgotten Realms or a setting with ambiguous gods. It's just jarring on too many levels to work unless the player knows what he is doing or if I'm willing to put work into managing it.

For the same reason some DM's don't like running evil characters, some DM's just couldn't put up with that and couldn't view it as anything but a disruption to the setting and to the established playstyle of the DM.

shadow_archmagi
2010-02-08, 01:56 PM
Theoretically, what's to stop me playing a cleric of "Not liking that guy over there"? Why not? According to this strict interpretation of RAW, as long as you beleive it's a decent enough cause you can. So if I think someone over there is a real *censored* I should suddenly start gaining divine spells?


My games are pretty casual, so I'd totally let my player play a Cleric of Anti-Steve. I'd probably convince him to go the extra mile, and so at the beginning of the session he'd hand out little pamphlets detailing the evils of Steve.

Kylarra
2010-02-08, 01:57 PM
My games are pretty casual, so I'd totally let my player play a Cleric of Anti-Steve. I'd probably convince him to go the extra mile, and so at the beginning of the session he'd hand out little pamphlets detailing the evils of Steve.Would you have a replacement steve appear if he ever managed to get rid of steve? Complete with sash of course.

lsfreak
2010-02-08, 02:01 PM
Why wouldn't the Nay-Theist just be a Wizard or a Fighter?
Fluff =/= mechanics. I don't know how much simpler I can make it, and I've now said it three times in this very thread. The fluff of the class has ZERO bearing on how it should be played. There is no reason why you should be forced to play a different class merely because your fluff doesn't quite fit that presented in a book.

SaintRidley
2010-02-08, 02:04 PM
{Scrubbed}

Piedmon_Sama
2010-02-08, 02:08 PM
I have an "Atheist Cleric" (even if it's only technically so) because primarily he's a Mereological Nihilist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mereological_nihilism). He believes the gods are an illusion because everything is an illusion. "Reality" only exists at the particle level; all semblages of bound atoms are passing illusions that will disappear in a cosmic eyeblink. (And the Prestige class he's aiming for, of course, is Entropomancer).

There was no need to inject modern scientific knowledge into the D&D setting, either. Atomic theory is as ancient as Sidhartha Gautama in India or Democritus in the West. You could simply have your Cleric be a philosopher/naturalist who takes Atomic Theory to its fullest ramifications.

Nero24200
2010-02-08, 02:11 PM
Fluff =/= mechanics. I don't know how much simpler I can make it, and I've now said it three times in this very thread. The fluff of the class has ZERO bearing on how it should be played. There is no reason why you should be forced to play a different class merely because your fluff doesn't quite fit that presented in a book.

Not everyone wants to play that way. Some people (Myself included) want and have fluff as part of the class. Remove fluff and all you have is a bunch of numbers.

If you feel it's acceptable, fine, but I don't see how it makes it a valid arugment. I don't like the idea of an aethest cleric because it pretty much boils down to "I want these abilities, but not the fluff of the class" and, in my opinion, this is the kind of thinking that encourages the Stormwind Fallacy.

Optimystik
2010-02-08, 02:17 PM
Not everyone wants to play that way. Some people (Myself included) want and have fluff as part of the class. Remove fluff and all you have is a bunch of numbers.

It's not about removing fluff. It's about shaping it.

Fluff is mutable - period. Some of it more than others, perhaps, but all of it can be tweaked and shifted.


If you feel it's acceptable, fine, but I don't see how it makes it a valid arugment. I don't like the idea of an aethest cleric because it pretty much boils down to "I want these abilities, but not the fluff of the class" and, in my opinion, this is the kind of thinking that encourages the Stormwind Fallacy.

This has nothing to do with Stormwind, actually. The idea of a godless cleric is explicitly allowed and fluffed in the rules. There's no tradeoff between concept and power in this situation.

Mewtarthio
2010-02-08, 02:18 PM
If you feel it's acceptable, fine, but I don't see how it makes it a valid arugment. I don't like the idea of an aethest cleric because it pretty much boils down to "I want these abilities, but not the fluff of the class" and, in my opinion, this is the kind of thinking that encourages the Stormwind Fallacy.

By the Stormwind Fallacy, you mean the belief that roleplaying and optimization are opposing forces, correct? But wouldn't the atheist cleric do the exact opposite? If you allow players to re-fluff their builds, then you allow them roleplay however they wish without affecting their mechanical optimization.

Moriato
2010-02-08, 02:30 PM
Can you have a cleric who is also an atheist? Sure, of course you can.

Can you have a cleric of atheism? Ehh... not really. Atheism is not a cause, or an ideal, and it's certainly not a diety.

Being a cleric of atheism would be similar to being a cleric of "Hey, lets go see a movie", or a cleric of "Apples are good for you". Not a cleric of apples, but a cleric of "Apples are good for you".

See what I mean?

lsfreak
2010-02-08, 02:34 PM
It's not about removing fluff. It's about shaping it.

He put it much better than I did.

LurkerInPlayground
2010-02-08, 02:35 PM
I have an "Atheist Cleric" (even if it's only technically so) because primarily he's a Mereological Nihilist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mereological_nihilism). He believes the gods are an illusion because everything is an illusion. "Reality" only exists at the particle level; all semblages of bound atoms are passing illusions that will disappear in a cosmic eyeblink. (And the Prestige class he's aiming for, of course, is Entropomancer).

There was no need to inject modern scientific knowledge into the D&D setting, either. Atomic theory is as ancient as Sidhartha Gautama in India or Democritus in the West. You could simply have your Cleric be a philosopher/naturalist who takes Atomic Theory to its fullest ramifications.
Eh. That doesn't exactly sound world-dashingly revolutionary as I'm sure mystics and ascetics all over the globe have been contemplating that whole "reality is an illusion" riddle for some time now.

It seems to come down to the point that calling it an "illusion" is mostly semantics. I prefer "useful linguistic convention" to "illusion" myself.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-08, 02:38 PM
Secondly, it ruins the whole tone of the game when you let something as stupid as a Stereotype-Atheist-That-Really-Actually-Is-A-Maltheist-Powered-By-Faith run around.

Then just don't be a stereotype. If you're running any sort of game where the Athar wouldn't be ridiculous (and considering the similarity of the "default setting" to Planescape, I'd say a lot of games are like that), a misotheist cleric (or anything) shouldn't be too out of place. Surely I would question the motives of any player wishing to play such a thing (some people go against "stereotypes" just for the lulz), but it's not something I'd reject out of hand.

LurkerInPlayground
2010-02-08, 02:40 PM
Also:
No. No. No.

You're missing my point entirely. If my clerics are defined as people who always get their powers from gods, then playing an atheist cleric is, not only insulting on a real-life basis, but disruptive to my ideas of the setting.

Secondly, clerics who get their power from Believing Hard Enough is, frankly, stupid. And also still insulting when said cleric is a self-declared "atheist." Particularly since atheists who actually make a cause of their atheism prefer to identify with rationalism and empiricism. It's not because it's convenient to identify with an ideology as a matter of faith. Believing hard enough is not good enough.

Yes, you could technically say that he is atheistic with regard to specific gods and not his own, but already you can see that people conflate a atheism with an ideology. And I don't want to have to hold somebody's hands and explain every fallacy they've made.

So it's not entirely invalid to ban the shoot down the idea entirely for those reasons for the same reasons that DM's simply say: "This is a good and heroic campaign."

Yes, as horrid and abhorrent as some of you find placing bans on mechanical versatility. That happens for reasons that have nothing to do with customization.

Optimystik
2010-02-08, 02:45 PM
Can you have a cleric of atheism? Ehh... not really. Atheism is not a cause, or an ideal, and it's certainly not a diety.

Atheism as we understand it, no.

But in D&D - where gods provably exist - atheism takes on a new twist. There, an atheist would be someone who does not deny their existence - rather, he would be someone who regards them as charlatans, users and granters of a power that even they barely understand. Such a cleric would want to bypass the gods and access the force empowering them. He may do it out of concern for a neglected world (Good), the desire to unlock the secrets of creation (Neutral), or even out of hate and jealousy (Evil.)

Such a cleric would not be venerating the mere absence of gods - he would be venerating a power that should be freely accessible to all mortals, instead of being doled out in dribbles by dogmatic clergy mired in pointless norms and traditions.

I would let him have domains like Magic, Knowledge, Community, Mysticism and Pride.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-08, 02:45 PM
You're missing my point entirely. If my clerics are defined as people who always get their powers from gods, then playing an atheist cleric is, not only insulting on a real-life basis, but disruptive to my ideas of the setting.
Ah, yeah, I missed that "if" statement entirely. Sorry about that.


Secondly, clerics who get their power from Believing Hard Enough is, frankly, stupid.
Well, it's the default PHB RAW, so many people tend to assume it. Many things in RAW are stupid, but eh.


And I don't want to have to hold somebody's hands and explain every fallacy they've made.

Looking back at the average post in this thread...
Yeah, I'm going to have to agree with you on all these points, actually. Just without as much zeal.


There, an atheist would be someone who does not deny their existence - rather, he would be someone who regards them as charlatans, users and granters of a power that even they barely understand.
That's a very liberal interpretation of the definition of "atheism" put up by the OP a while ago.

LurkerInPlayground
2010-02-08, 02:49 PM
Well, it's the default PHB RAW, so many people tend to assume it. Many things in RAW are stupid, but eh.
No, I mean, the whole literal postmodern thing. You don't believe other gods out of existence and you don't believe the laws of physics into being because there's a Consensus of viewpoints.

It's absurd.

The default position is that gods benefit from belief of their worshipers in some unknown way, if at all. Maybe they just like sycophants or soldiers for their cause.

But it's mostly a two-way contract where a cleric answers to the god in exchange for worldly power.

A setting where there are factions that literally war with the gods is a cool idea but it is not the default.

shadow_archmagi
2010-02-08, 02:54 PM
Also:
Secondly, clerics who get their power from Believing Hard Enough is, frankly, stupid.



And yet it's right there. Clerics can worship a cause, like Deforestation or Utopia. Cleric is not defined as "Person who gets his power from a god" in D&D. Heck, even in the real world, it just amounts to "Religious Guy" and a religion doesn't need to have a god by default.



Believing hard enough is not good enough.


By the book, it is!

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-08, 02:56 PM
Also, on a random note concerning the OP:

If you're dead-set on a misotheist cleric, consider the Divine Counterspell variant on page 33 of Complete Mage.

LurkerInPlayground
2010-02-08, 02:57 PM
By the book, it is!
Again, no it's not.

You don't literally shape reality with belief. Which is why the whole Cleric of Atheism idea is inane on that particular level

The gods exist or they don't. What you believe about them has squat to do with whether they are real or not or whether they can squash you like a bug. You don't "wish" them away.

Yes, technically, you can fluff it as a kind of person who has powers to combat the gods for some setting-contrived reason. But that's not what's happening here.

My problem isn't that belief is a requisite for interacting with and having contracts with powerful beings. Or that gods specifically draw power from it (although that's unclear), but that reality is literally determined as a basis of faith. And by D&D default, it's not. That's way different than the kind of Gnostic "drawing power from a metaphysical idea" thing that you're going with.

Sorry, that character concept won't fly if you put faith and atheism in the same boat. Especially if Terry Pratchett humor isn't the point.

Piedmon_Sama
2010-02-08, 03:32 PM
Eh. That doesn't exactly sound world-dashingly revolutionary as I'm sure mystics and ascetics all over the globe have been contemplating that whole "reality is an illusion" riddle for some time now.

It seems to come down to the point that calling it an "illusion" is mostly semantics. I prefer "useful linguistic convention" to "illusion" myself.

Atomic theory is as old as Democritus, who was apparently an Atheist himself (though we largely only know him through his critics) but the idea of nihilism is something that could be quite radical in a setting of hidebound morals. If your cleric (as mine does) declares that since nothing has true permanence and therefore, true existence (because if something does not exist permanently, it does not exist at all, our perception to the contrary being just a product of our inability to perceive the universe as it is), then morality is undone. We are all "free" to impose our will on the cosmos if we have the courage to seize it.

I'm not actually endorsing that belief, but it can make for a pretty fun and memorable character (as I think the one I'm playing right now is). "You fools cling to your myths; I am BORN FROM NOTHINGNESS!" *Flings entropic shard*

It helps if you can do a really pompous German accent. Also my character writes incredibly tedious philosophical essays and tries to pass them out on everyone, so he's at least as annoying as a preachy cleric. :p

Hallavast
2010-02-08, 04:45 PM
Again, no it's not. Why are you so adamant about this? There are examples to the contrary.



You don't literally shape reality with belief. Which is why the whole Cleric of Atheism idea is inane on that particular level Pretty damn close. If you can eliminate belief in a particular diety in some settings, you pretty much negate that god's existence.



The gods exist or they don't. What you believe about them has squat to do with whether they are real or not or whether they can squash you like a bug. You don't "wish" them away.


Again, in some settings, you will find Gods whose existence/power depends on people's beliefs. It's rather absurd to throw aside these examples simply because they are not RAW in the PHB.

Edit: The "whole literal postmodern thing" is rather beside the point of the discussion. We are not discussing real reality. We are rather discussing potential fictional realities. If you just wanna say existing published material is "absurd" or that you don't like it, then fine. But that's different than discussing whether it is correct or not.

Optimystik
2010-02-08, 04:48 PM
That's a very liberal interpretation of the definition of "atheism" put up by the OP a while ago.

*Shrug*

I'll take it, especially since by RAW I don't really have to come up with anything.

aboyd
2010-02-08, 04:51 PM
Theoretically, what's to stop me playing a cleric of "Not liking that guy over there"? Why not? According to this strict interpretation of RAW, as long as you beleive it's a decent enough cause you can.
I think you've done a good job of Reductio ad absurdum. It effectively makes your point. If someone tried this in my campaign, I'd shut it down for the same reason I'd shut pun-pun down -- it may be possible by a strained reading of the rules, but it's absolutely not the kind of broken game I want to run.

Having said that, I don't require my players to worship a god. But they must have a power source! They could become pure vessels of alignment and draw power from one of the 9 aligned planes. They could become necromancer-ish and align with the negative energy plane (I would expect an appropriate domain to match, even if we had to invent one). But whatever the case, the player would have to clearly outline where the power comes from, and the thing providing that power must actually be recognized as a real thing in the game world that has power to give!


If my clerics are defined as people who always get their powers from gods, then playing an atheist cleric is, not only insulting on a real-life basis, but disruptive to my ideas of the setting.
Well at least according to this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7842500#post7842500), if you are brazen enough to have created a setting full of ideas you wish to adhere to, you deserve to have your setting disrupted. :smallbiggrin:


But in D&D - where gods provably exist - atheism takes on a new twist. There, an atheist would be someone who does not deny their existence - rather, he would be someone who regards them as charlatans, users and granters of a power that even they barely understand.
There is a word for that already, and it's not atheism, and nobody here is opposing such a concept, from what I can see. So there is no need to redefine atheism -- and if we do, everyone must revisit their arguments about atheism to adjust them for the new definition. That's an unnecessary mess.

Atheism as defined by dictionaries is what is at issue. In our world it's a perhaps-logical conclusion based upon evidence (or some would say, the lack of it). In D&D it's ridiculous and severely blasphemous thinking that not only denies provable reality but will also probably end with the character struck dead by divine energy bolts from the sky.

Optimystik
2010-02-08, 05:06 PM
Not only is true atheism ludicrous in D&D, it's also not what the OP wanted at all.

I quote:


So I had this idea: a Cleric of Atheism.

He may or maynot beleive in the existance of gods (in this case he will likely be proved wrong midcampaign),
He does however deny them his worship,
wether they need worship or not.
He may believe gods exist and have power, but that there power only comes from having worshiper, thus they arn't derseving of worship.
he proably believes his spells come for observation of rituals - cheats/Hack's for the World.
he may beleive that divine magic is just another kind of arcane magic,
what ever


Emphasis mine. So why the heck are we grinding the dictionary to a fine snortable powder again?

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-08, 05:14 PM
So why the heck are we grinding the dictionary to a fine snortable powder again?

Because the dictionary definitions were earlier posted, and substituting misotheist/dystheist/maltheist is a rather simple task in order to improve clarity?

Optimystik
2010-02-08, 05:21 PM
Because the dictionary definitions were earlier posted, and substituting misotheist/dystheist/maltheist is a rather simple task in order to improve clarity?

Oh I'm sure everything's much clearer now. We can go ahead and get this closed, I bet!

Signmaker
2010-02-08, 05:24 PM
Because the dictionary definitions were earlier posted, and substituting misotheist/dystheist/maltheist is a rather simple task in order to improve clarity?

Because most people knew what those were before this thread. I for one only knew two of the three listed in the quote. Lumping a bunch of minor god-misaligned theisms under atheism is just as a matter of convenience.

Nero24200
2010-02-08, 05:25 PM
This has nothing to do with Stormwind, actually. The idea of a godless cleric is explicitly allowed and fluffed in the rules. There's no tradeoff between concept and power in this situation.

My reasoning behind it encroching Stromwind Fallacy is that it comes across that you're okay with people taking a class purely for it's mechanical benifits without being willing to take it's fluff aspects.

The idea behind the Stormwind Fallacy is that you can take overpoweing mechanical choices and still fit the fluff and doing an intersteing roleplay, but that's completely different in this case. If someone approached me with this cleric idea my first thoguht would be that they don't actually care about the class or the fluff - they just want the 9th level spells and heavy armour. And well...if you remove the fluff as you surgest, you're doing just that, so it's no surprise that people begin shouting things like "Powerful characters are bad for roleplay!"

aboyd
2010-02-08, 05:26 PM
So why the heck are we grinding the dictionary to a fine snortable powder again?
I believe because words have commonly understood meanings, and subverting those meanings renders it difficult or impossible to have a discussion, especially as people drop in & out, and may not all be up to speed on the thread-exclusive terminology.

So we agree that your suggestion isn't atheism and isn't opposed by many in this thread. If we change atheism to mean what you suggest, we will get false opposition from those who confuse your meaning with the commonly accepted meaning.

Having these terms straight saves us grief. Someone earlier in the thread put words to a handful of these terms. We should use those. In your case, I think maybe Misotheism is the term you need. And I have no opposition to such a cleric (though again I'd demand a power source) -- I'd view it similar to the wizard killing classes in D&D. I think to power it I might have the character worship the Lady of Pain, as she denies the gods their godhood. However, the Lady herself kills those that dare worship her as a god, so hmm. That's a problem.

In any case, if such a cleric were even remotely successful -- at least in my campaign where I have some gods walking among the people -- the character would be killed dead before it got too powerful. It's not really a viable long-term build in my world. However if you're willing to roleplay him/her up to level 3, 4, 5, or 6, and then be utterly killed with overwhelming force and no chance of resurrection, and then roll up a new character, I'd be OK with it. It would even be interesting for a short time. I'd enjoy role playing NPC commoners fleeing from the character as he or she preaches taking down the gods. The player would probably get frustrated as no inn would provide rooms, even entire cities bar entry, etc. But if a player is really willing to role play it and is OK with how it plays out, then by all means, let's see what happens.

Aquillion
2010-02-08, 05:58 PM
Secondly, clerics who get their power from Believing Hard Enough is, frankly, stupid. And also still insulting when said cleric is a self-declared "atheist." Particularly since atheists who actually make a cause of their atheism prefer to identify with rationalism and empiricism. It's not because it's convenient to identify with an ideology as a matter of faith. Believing hard enough is not good enough.What's wrong with being a cleric of Rationalism and Empiricism? "I will now heal you, WITH SCIENCE! In the name of Reason, BE HEALED!"

"Blazing Empirical power, fire of truth: REASON'S MIGHT!"

My unshakable belief in pure reason lets me draw on the cosmic divine power that (in my view) so-called divinities usurp to claim to be gods. Not only are they usurpers, but that raw divine power is the birthright of all people, if they had the strength in their convictions to seize it. So my hero travels the land, casting down the shrines of the usurper gods and dueling their priests to try and discredit them, seeking to free the minds of humanity so they can come into the power that is theirs by right.

(Am I correct? Well, that's another story. It's boring to take something like that and say that you're definitively correct or incorrect. My character thinks they're correct, certainly. Other people disagree, but in a magical setting, the force of my conviction is enough for me to draw on divine power in any case.)

Believing hard is totally good enough, in a magical setting. That's what the books say. It's not enough to just believe -- you need the training to channel and focus your belief, represented by cleric levels -- but any sort of belief is enough to power that knowledge, in most settings. You don't need a divinity.

Optimystik
2010-02-08, 06:33 PM
My reasoning behind it encroching Stromwind Fallacy is that it comes across that you're okay with people taking a class purely for it's mechanical benifits without being willing to take it's fluff aspects.

This would be a fine complaint if having a deity was an inseparable part of cleric fluff. It isn't!

@ *****: I get what you're saying, and I agree - real-world atheism can't and shouldn't work for clerics in D&D. D&D atheism (or misotheism, maltheism, whatever-ism) is more along the lines of refusing to make a choice, rather than believing that no choice is possible.

The problem is - anyone who lives in a D&D world and is truly an atheist has to have a single-digit Wisdom score to begin with. Any true atheist in a D&D world who is trying to be a cleric is one allip attack away from being a drooling vegetable.

I just don't consider the real-world definition of atheism worthy of discussion in the context of D&D. Even the Athar KNOW there are gods, no matter how much they despise/ignore them. Furthermore, the OP made no reference at all to real atheism in his post, whatever his choice of words. So this entire dictionary tangent is meaningless.

aboyd
2010-02-08, 06:43 PM
Furthermore, the OP made no reference at all to real atheism in his post, whatever his choice of words. So this entire dictionary tangent is meaningless.
Uh, his title for the entire thread?

lsfreak
2010-02-08, 06:46 PM
Well... really that depends on the setting. I've certainly played settings where clerics really are based wholly on faith, with the gods either so distant that they don't interact, or gods that don't actually exist. From my limited knowledge of Eberron, it has clerics whose powers are effectively based on non-existent gods as well. At that point, atheism could have a place.

Optimystik
2010-02-08, 07:46 PM
If you actually read his post, he's not referencing real atheism at all.

Note the qualifier - real. As in, actual.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-08, 07:52 PM
So this entire dictionary tangent is meaningless.

Yes, the tangent is meaningless, but IMO it will continue until we get our terminology straight.

Optimystik
2010-02-08, 08:08 PM
Yes, the tangent is meaningless, but IMO it will continue until we get our terminology straight.

That had the ring of "the beatings will continue until morale improves." :smallwink:

In any case, more power to the lexicographers I say.

Raendyn
2010-02-09, 10:12 AM
{Scrubbed}

Optimystik
2010-02-09, 10:27 AM
{Scrubbed}

Aquillion
2010-02-09, 03:24 PM
{Scrubbed}

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-09, 03:27 PM
i am complaining that ppl f***ed up the thread. with the favored soul blah blah.
Except they didn't. The only reason we're still talking about favored souls is you. We've moved on (to meaningless semantic arguments); you're the one who insists on f***ing up the thread (very sophisticated word choice, BTW) with this tangent about favored souls and WotC sucking and all that.


Don't start about all spontaneous classes.
Why not?


either you know how things were made up/their order....either you dont.
Yes - those are, by the rules of logic, the only possible categories. Yuki_Akuma fits into the former category, in that he knows the order in which sorcerers and favored souls were made up. How is this relevant?

ScionoftheVoid
2010-02-09, 07:17 PM
i am complaining that ppl f***ed up the thread. with the favored soul blah blah.

& i jsut mentioned they were founded just because there was a need for spontaneous divine spell cast.they had no base to put themon they had no concept to suport them.
Don't start about all spontaneous classes.either you know how things were made up/their order....either you dont.

Just a tip, people tend to respond more positively to you (or at least understand your point better) if you appear to have looked over your post for errors. If the person posting something does not appear to care enough about it to use proper spelling/grammar/general coherency then why would anyone else take their post seriously?:smalltongue:

Edit: For example this

I am complaining about people ruining the thread with off-topic conversation about the Favoured Soul and similar things.

I just proposed that they were only designed because there was no spontaneous Divine spellcaster. There was no underlying theme or concept to them.
Please don't mention the Arcane spontanteous casters. Either you know the order that the classes were made in or you do not.
is far easier to read and take seriously than the original post. I may not have represented your argument very well, but at times I could not see an actual point so I just went for grammar and spelling correction. I am sorry if this is the case.

Roland St. Jude
2010-03-01, 12:17 AM
Sheriff of Moddingham: This seemed doomed from the start to get into real world religion, but I gave it a fair opportunity. Thread locked.