Should a Monotheistic Religion's Deity Have All Domains, Or None?

[~xFellWardenx~]

Title pretty much says all. Neither I nor any of the forum moderators want to hear any references to real-life religions and whether or not their deity reigns over everything here: but from a thematic and balance perspective, if a setting has only one deity from which Clerics/other Divine casters can draw their spells, should that deity have all the domains, or none of them?

[TiaC]

It should have a lot, but probably not all. If the only god is a creator for example, they probably don't have the destruction domain.

[SamaelOfChaos]

Wouldn't that highly depend on what that deity is about? Like, if it's a deity of order and righteousness and being pleasant to kittens, giving it the chaos or evil domain would be silly. Having only one god/goddess/tentacle monster just means that in the end you would probably not be able to use all of the domains in your game, unless you somehow manage to make some overlord be all end all alpha and omega thing to be the deity, but let's be honest here, those rarely ever are actually interesting in fantasy settings.

In my understanding, every kind of deity has to have some semblance of doctrine, otherwise you have these commoner folk worshiping some kind of forest spirits or other "parts" of some larger deity, but not the whole.

ACTUALLY this makes for a fascinating setup! Have there be only one deity, but there still would be religious wars in the setting about what "part" of the deity is more worthy of worship than the other. Makes for a cool story... but I've gotten slightly offtopic, sorry :D

[Sith_Happens]

It should have no more or less than all of the domains appropriate to its nature, portfolio, and dogma. While those first two things will necessarily be much broader than for a member of a pantheon, they need not be all-encompassing. There's always nontheistic Clerics to fill in the gaps.

[AnonymousPepper]

It should have no more or less than all of the domains appropriate to its nature, portfolio, and dogma. While those first two things will necessarily be much broader than for a member of a pantheon, they need not be all-encompassing. There's always nontheistic Clerics to fill in the gaps.

This. Never forget that clerics do not always have to be devoted to a god - they can be dedicated to an alignment as well. And unaligned clerics can take basically whatever domains they want... in fact, I don't think it's basically, I think it actually is a smorgasbord of all of the ones available, with the possible exceptions of good clerics not taking evil, lawful not taking chaos, and so on.

If you're not satisfied with that, make an opposing deity.

The Abrahamic example, for the sake of illustration, would be that God would have about half the domains and Satan would have the other half, with some overlap here and there (Destruction, for example).

[TuggyNE]

What I came in here to say has mostly already been said; essentially, no, just because a religion has only one deity that encompasses everything they consider deific does not mean that deity will concern itself with anything any religion ever might consider deific. Indeed, most would make rather a point of not doing so. There is no reason for the same deity to have at once the Good and Evil domains, the Death, Undeath, Repose, and Glory domains, and so forth. For that matter, a number of domains only make sense if you have a deity that is dedicated almost solely to that concept; the Fire domain is generally rather dubious at best, and the Animal or Trickery or Gluttony domain is probably completely out.

Put slightly differently, collect all the ideas the religion considers most important, most sacred; those are the portfolio of the deity, and the source of its domains. Anything that's not in there is not crucial and doesn't belong, even though, of course, it is technically within the purview of the deity, since everything is. But there's a difference between "I rule everything" and "I exemplify everything". A vast difference. And a domain is only appropriate when the deity considers that a major positive part of their doctrine and purpose.

[Sith_Happens]

This. Never forget that clerics do not always have to be devoted to a god - they can be dedicated to an alignment as well. And unaligned clerics can take basically whatever domains they want... in fact, I don't think it's basically, I think it actually is a smorgasbord of all of the ones available, with the possible exceptions of good clerics not taking evil, lawful not taking chaos, and so on.

It's not quite free pickings, you're still supposed to be able to explain how your domains make sense together.

[Chronos]

I would go with a number of different orders worshiping the same god, but worshiping in different ways, and emphasizing different aspects of the god. Clerics of each order would then have three or four domains to choose from, similar to the D&D default of each deity having three or four domains.

[awa]

I think if the diety is the only god you could spread out the domains depending on how the god is worshiped. So i would give them any domain not opposed to the god. If demon lords exist they can pick up any that are opposed.

What i mean is the primary doctrine might not be very plant oriented but rural priests who spend their time praying for good crops should be allowed to take the plant domain. Inquisitors burning witches should be able to take the fire domain ect.

[Mnemnosyne]

If your cosmology actually has only one divine being, then...you pretty much have to decide whether this divine being is an all-encompassing one that includes all aspects of reality or not. Is this a god that is both good and evil, creator and destroyer, etc, etc? If so, then sure, give it all domains.

If not, then only give it the domains appropriate for its actual behavior and dogma, but also consider what happens to the stuff that he does not represent. In a world where only one god exists, if that god is good, then what of evil? Does this world allow clerics of no deity? If so, then that does cover the existence of evil clerics, but the existence of a god is still a powerful weight on that side of the scale. A world where the only real god is a good one seems as though it should be largely weighted toward good; evil may be like a weed that crops up here and there, but by and large everything is good and evil probably shouldn't get all that far, because when one side has an actual deity pushing its agenda and the other side doesn't, the side with the god is probably going to be come out on top more often than not. Alternately, if the only deity is evil, then the world becomes a pretty dark place, for the same reasons.

Of course, if it is only the religion that is monotheistic, and other gods exist but are not worshiped or acknowledged as gods by this religion's followers, then you don't really have a conflict. The god gets whatever domains are appropriate for his portfolio and dogma, and doesn't get those that aren't.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I would go with a number of different orders worshiping the same god, but worshiping in different ways, and emphasizing different aspects of the god. Clerics of each order would then have three or four domains to choose from, similar to the D&D default of each deity having three or four domains.
From a game balance perspective, I think this is the best approach.

[Fitz10019]

I had an idea like this to use within a tradional D&D setting like Greyhawk, where the monotheism was a belief that all known gods are simply aspects of the One. This faith was called the Burden, because it teaches that the elf and the orc should accept each other as siblings.

In the OP's case, I suggest you sidestep the issue by having the equivalent of saints or messiahs from the setting's history, who each have different themes or teachings, and therefore different domains.

[Red Fel]

I would say "some," but not all or none. I offer two reasons.

First, consider the "Faith of the Sun" in Deities and Demigods. It has a single deity, Taiia, representing the positive and negative aspects of the sun. She gets a boatload of domains, depending on the aspect (creator or destroyer) worshipped. One gets Air, Chaos, Good, Healing, and others; the other gets Chaos, Death, Destruction, Evil, and others. She gets a lot, but not all of them.

Next, consider an example from fiction: R'hllor, the Lord of Light from A Song of Ice and Fire. This is a deity whose followers believe solely in the Red God, to the exclusion of other worshiped deities - so it's safe to say their faith is monotheistic. His domains would likely include Sun, Fire, Law, Magic, and Death, given that his worship includes witchcraft and mysticism, strict adherence to rules, and the burning of heretics at the stake. This is not a deity who would have all domains, again, but just those relevant ones.

Next, consider another D&D example, the Sovereign Host of Eberron. Although comprised of several deities, the Host is effectively a single godhead, a combined font of divine energies. Worship of the Host is thus collective, rather than individual. The Host provides any domain granted by its individual members; while there is a lot of overlap, the individual deities cover almost every domain. (Almost.) They don't cover Evil, as I recall, being a collectively LG godhead (despite some members being more Neutral), but they cover things like War, Strength, Magic, Law, Air, Fire, and other fun stuff.

Finally, consider this. Unless it were some type of cult, no D&D-based religion could be truly monotheistic. Granted, most Clerics and other divine classes worship a single deity from the pantheon, and even ordinary citizens generally have one patron. In that sense, any of them could be considered monotheistic. But given the abundance omnipresence of divine magic, it's virtually impossible (short of extensive self-delusion) to actually believe in a single deity in the D&D setting. Even if you could, consider also that the other deities would be a bit aggressive with regard to domains, and wouldn't be happy about a single deity hogging them all. More likely, you'll have a single deity with several domains (including Trickery) who convinces his followers that the other "gods" are really just tricks he's pulling, and that his followers are the only ones clever enough to see through it.

Now, if you're proposing a setting in which there is only a single god, you may have to give it a lot more in the domain department, seeing as it will be the sole source for divine power in the setting. If it doesn't have a domain, that aspect of reality effectively doesn't exist. This is why many create a monotheistic deity and an antagonist figure (see R'hllor's enemy, the Other) or a dualistic deity system (see Elishar and Toldoth, of the "Following the Light" religion, in Deities and Demigods). This allows your players to choose one or the other. It's actually very hard to establish a functional divine system with a single being in charge.

Even Ao learned to delegate.

[Urpriest]

Basically, you need to have room for all of the types of Clerics in your setting. If the only Clerics are holy blaster types and there aren't any of the "armies of undead" sort, then you only need to give your one deity the holy blaster domains. But if you want a diversity of Clerics, you need a diversity of domains.