Question about Deities

[Dr_Lovejoy]

Hello everyone,
I'm currently creating a 5e character, and am new to the edition. Luckily I have the player's handbook, so I have covered the more basic rules of this edition and whatnot, but am mainly stuck on the selection of a deity. The character I am creating is a Half-Elf bard, who's alignment is Chaotic Neutral. Now, I am new to this alignment (hence the reason I picked it) and am having difficulty selecting deities that work with this alignment that catch my eye. I am mainly looking into attempting to find out more about the lore with the deities listed in the player's handbook, and am open to suggestions. Thanks for reading my long-winded post! :smallsmile:

[Ace Jackson]

Depending on how bard-y your bard will be this is the bardic god.

http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Milil

You might also consider Oghma, or just wonder around that site for a while.

[Dr_Lovejoy]

Depending on how bard-y your bard will be this is the bardic god.

http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Milil

I was under the impression that the characters alignment had to work with the deities?
It says in that link that those that normally follow this god are LG, NG, or CG, but states that it is namely GOOD, whereas my character is simply CN. Isn't a namely 'Good' deity impeding on a person who does not care so much about morality, but mostly on freedom and personal expression?

[Ace Jackson]

I was under the impression that the characters alignment had to work with the deities?
It says in that link that those that normally follow this god are LG, NG, or CG, but states that it is namely GOOD, whereas my character is simply CN. Isn't a namely 'Good' deity impeding on a person who does not care so much about morality, but mostly on freedom and personal expression?

Generally yes, however, the bard class has no technical, mechanical might be a better word, direct connect to any purely divine powers, and alignment has been dieing a slow death for a long time. Happy, sad, or indifferent about that, the first step would be talking to your GM to see what they think. Also, he does explicitly represent all bards, I think he'd realize not everyone is willing to stretch their necks out too far for anyone all the time.

P.S. Stories are often told for being about exceptions rather then rules, just a thought, and again, that site has a great many deities for you to browse from if you'd rather someone else. Like Oghma as the first to come to my mind, though I play a cleric of Lathander, and am honestly unfamiliar with much of the FR pantheon beyond two chain links from his page.

[Ace Jackson]

All told, I think I made a mistake, I still don't know what your character will be, I have a race, class, and an alignment to extrapolate from, but those a character do not make, in order for anyone to offer any more personalized ideas, we'll need to know a little more about how you'll play your character. Are they driven by artistic integrity or wealth? Will they be of lore or valor? What do you see your character bringing to the adventuring party? Etc. etc.

[Dr_Lovejoy]

All told, I think I made a mistake, I still don't know what your character will be, I have a race, class, and an alignment to extrapolate from, but those a character do not make, in order for anyone to offer any more personalized ideas, we'll need to know a little more about how you'll play your character. Are they driven by artistic integrity or wealth? Will they be of lore or valor? What do you see your character bringing to the adventuring party? Etc. etc.

Hm, valid point. If you are interested I could PM you the details in order to come to a better idea of what it is I'm looking for based around my character. Apologies, I tend to be the person that thinks aloud, so to speak, and through collaborating I tend to not only figure things out for myself, but also get a better depiction of my character.

[Naanomi]

While it has changed some over the editions, and 5e has made no stance I think, traditionally in FR a Cleric can be 'one step' away from their God's alignment, and a normal follower can be 'two steps' away. A CN chap could follow anything except a LG and CE God... Lots of options on the table depending on other parts of your character's focus.

[Zevox]

Since you're not a Cleric, there's really no restrictions on what you can do as far as deities go. You don't need to worship one at all - although it's very likely that someone living in a world where people can visibly gain magical powers from worshiping a god would believe the gods exist, it's certainly within the realm of possibility for a person to just not be particularly religious (like Roy from OotS), or not have heard of any god whose teachings they'd want to follow.

If you do want to worship one, try to find one that fits your character's personality. A bard whose focus is learning ancient lore might follow a god of knowledge (such as Oghma or Deneir); one who is more the traveling minstrel sort might prefer a god of travelers (such as Selûne or Shaundakul); one who is more roguish and unscrupulous might worship a god of thieves or darkness (such as Mask or Shar); or one who is particularly focused on entertaining and making others happy might worship a god of the arts or revelry (such as Milil or Lliira). And there could be any number of other possibilities. Just drawing from the Forgotten Realms (all of my previous examples are from there, by the way, since that's the one setting I'm very familiar with), for instance, almost anyone might be a worshiper of Tymora, goddess of good luck, or Lathander, god of the dawn, simply because their teachings are very optimistic and popular among all kinds of people.

Alignment isn't a concern, as long as it makes sense for your particular character to want to follow that god's teachings. Personally, I'd enforce some degree of alignment restriction for Clerics (perhaps not quite as stringent as the old one-step rule, but not far off either), but even that would be a house-rule. There are no alignment requirements on anything in 5e.*

*Well, there may as well be a "non-evil" alignment requirement on the Paladin class, but that's just because it would be awfully hard to be evil but not break a Paladin's oath - technically you can be an evil Paladin by the rules if you can pull that off.

[Dr_Lovejoy]

Since you're not a Cleric, there's really no restrictions on what you can do as far as deities go. You don't need to worship one at all - although it's very likely that someone living in a world where people can visibly gain magical powers from worshiping a god would believe the gods exist, it's certainly within the realm of possibility for a person to just not be particularly religious (like Roy from OotS), or not have heard of any god whose teachings they'd want to follow.

If you do want to worship one, try to find one that fits your character's personality. A bard whose focus is learning ancient lore might follow a god of knowledge (such as Oghma or Deneir); one who is more the traveling minstrel sort might prefer a god of travelers (such as Selûne or Shaundakul); one who is more roguish and unscrupulous might worship a god of thieves or darkness (such as Mask or Shar); or one who is particularly focused on entertaining and making others happy might worship a god of the arts or revelry (such as Milil or Lliira). And there could be any number of other possibilities. Just drawing from the Forgotten Realms (all of my previous examples are from there, by the way, since that's the one setting I'm very familiar with), for instance, almost anyone might be a worshiper of Tymora, goddess of good luck, or Lathander, god of the dawn, simply because their teachings are very optimistic and popular among all kinds of people.

Alignment isn't a concern, as long as it makes sense for your particular character to want to follow that god's teachings. Personally, I'd enforce some degree of alignment restriction for Clerics (perhaps not quite as stringent as the old one-step rule, but not far off either), but even that would be a house-rule. There are no alignment requirements on anything in 5e.*

*Well, there may as well be a "non-evil" alignment requirement on the Paladin class, but that's just because it would be awfully hard to be evil but not break a Paladin's oath - technically you can be an evil Paladin by the rules if you can pull that off.

Ah, that clears up my whole 'alignment-conflicting' thing. (Thank you also, Naanomi) That was by biggest concern, though if that is something people are not too high-strung over, it makes the choice a LOT easier, seeing as how there were a few gods I felt my character would enjoy but was worried over being a 'step away' from the alignment. Thank you all very much for your feedback! It's greatly appreciated :smallbiggrin:

[KorvinStarmast]

I was under the impression that the characters alignment had to work with the deities?
Not as such. In 5e, there's a bit more leeway.
From Basic Rules pages 33 and 34, edited for brevity: (this is not changed in the PHB).

Alignment:
1. Most races have tendencies toward certain alignments ... these are not binding for player characters

2. Broadly describes moral and personal attitudes.

3. Is a combination of two factors:
a. morality (good, evil, or neutral)
b. attitudes toward society and order (lawful, chaotic, or neutral).

Key point: Individuals might vary significantly from that typical behavior, and few people are perfectly and consistently faithful to the precepts of their alignment.

Alignment In The Larger Sense

Humanoid races can choose whether to follow the paths of good or evil, law or chaos. According to myth, the good-aligned gods who created these races gave them free will to choose their moral paths, knowing that good without free will is slavery.

Evil deities created other to serve them (the deities) giving those races tendencies that match the nature of their gods.

You are a half elf, your level of the asserted free will opens up your alignment choices to vary from your deity's basic alignment.

This point means that deities have fewer alignment choices than humanoids.

Alignment is an essential part of the nature of celestials and fiends. A devil does not choose to be lawful evil, and it doesn’t tend toward lawful evil, but rather it is lawful evil in its essence. If it somehow ceased to be lawful evil, it would cease to be a devil.

[Naanomi]

Note in FR almost everyone has a patron God (for good cosmological reasons) in a way that isn't true in other settings; so it is good to explore the patron of an otherwise irreligious character

[Ralanr]

Note in FR almost everyone has a patron God (for good cosmological reasons) in a way that isn't true in other settings; so it is good to explore the patron of an otherwise irreligious character

As in their God is "inside" them? It was phrased like that in a Drizzit comic and I've been a little curious about that.

On topic: a chaotic evil person can worship a lawful good patron. This is actually pretty realistic because the person can misinterpret the deities views and beliefs entirely, take them to a logical extreme, and everything in between with 5e.

I'm not even sure if a cleric needs be be within one step of the alignment of their diety. I think that's just assumed.

But you're a bard, so that's not an issue. Now if you still want a chaotic neutral diety, then go for it.

I mean come on people. Just because someone has a diety doesn't mean it's a big part of their character. Some people are raised that way, some people like the things it stands for. Not everyone prays to it everyday, and those that do are not all clerics and or paladins

[rhouck]

Two other points to keep in mind:
1. The alignment of the deities themselves have shifted over the editions, so I'd focus more on their general tenets and how your character feels about them rather than the specific alignment WotC assigned
2. If one just followed the suggested domains and required that alignment match, then it would be impossible to be a "good" Tempest Cleric in the Forgotten Realms (Auril, Talos, and Umberlee are all evil). So like everything else, use what is listed as suggestions, and then look up the gods yourself (the Forgotten Realms wiki is great!). :smallsmile:

[SharkForce]

As in their God is "inside" them? It was phrased like that in a Drizzit comic and I've been a little curious about that.

FR rangers (ie drizzt) draw power from their gods to cast priestly spells.

but i'm fairly sure that isn't what he's talking about.

in FR, you basically either worship a god (any god), and in the afterlife you get to go to their domain (theoretically; up until a certain part of the FR timeline, the gods were pretty much ignoring their responsibility to bring their followers souls to their domain)...

or you can worship no god and you're stuck in myrkul's domain (now kelemvor's) for eternity. where you will probably be made into a zombie wall of some sort, iirc.

not many people feel terribly excited about the whole "eternity in a zombie wall" option, so there is an overwhelming tendency for people to worship a deity.

(reference: http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/The_Faithless )

[Ralanr]

FR rangers (ie drizzt) draw power from their gods to cast priestly spells.

but i'm fairly sure that isn't what he's talking about.

in FR, you basically either worship a god (any god), and in the afterlife you get to go to their domain (theoretically; up until a certain part of the FR timeline, the gods were pretty much ignoring their responsibility to bring their followers souls to their domain)...

or you can worship no god and you're stuck in myrkul's domain (now kelemvor's) for eternity. where you will probably be made into a zombie wall of some sort, iirc.

not many people feel terribly excited about the whole "eternity in a zombie wall" option, so there is an overwhelming tendency for people to worship a deity.

(reference: http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/The_Faithless )

....Well that setting now seems a bit more depressing.

[Zevox]

2. If one just followed the suggested domains and required that alignment match, then it would be impossible to be a "good" Tempest Cleric in the Forgotten Realms (Auril, Talos, and Umberlee are all evil). So like everything else, use what is listed as suggestions, and then look up the gods yourself (the Forgotten Realms wiki is great!). :smallsmile:
Honestly, there's no many options for Tempest Clerics in the Realms outside of those three, either. Valkur could probably qualify, but he's an awfully niche deity (god of sailors an naval combat). Other than him? Um, Istishia or Akadi (water and air elemental deities) maybe? But they're distant and uncaring, and as a result their followings are tiny by comparison to most other deities. And beyond them you need to start looking at specific racial deities that you'd be highly unlikely to worship unless you're the appropriate race - and even that amounts to what, a couple of Elven gods and maybe the Halfling nature goddess? Even the Mulhorandi pantheon doesn't help, since the PHB domains for Egyptian gods only gives Tempest to Set and Sebek, the two evil deities of the bunch.

Also in the category of "weird interactions between 5e domains and Forgotten Realms gods:" the Death domain. It explicitly exists as an option for evil/villainous characters, and seems to assume that those using it will be using undead, as it gives Create Undead as an auto-prepared spell. But the Realms' god of death and the dead, Kelemvor, is a Lawful Neutral "judge of the dead" type who could easily be worshiped by good-aligned clerics, and considers the undead to be abominations. His followers who take up adventuring are most often undead hunters, in fact. Yet that's the only domain he gives in the 5e PHB list. Yeah, that really doesn't work out very well.


As in their God is "inside" them? It was phrased like that in a Drizzit comic and I've been a little curious about that.
No. Not sure what that would be about, honestly.

The big reasons for people having a particular patron in the Forgotten Realms are twofold. One, the gods are very active in the setting, so it's even less likely to not believe they exist or not believe they're important than it is in other settings. Two, the way the afterlife functions, which is entirely dependent on your worship of a deity (as opposed to the default in D&D, where your afterlife is dependent only on your alignment).

The dead in the Forgotten Realms are collected on the Fugue Plain outside the City of the Dead, where the god of the dead (currently Kelemvor) judges them before sending them to the appropriate afterlife. There are three possible judgments: Faithful, False, and Faithless.

The Faithful are those who worshiped some deity or another reasonably faithfully. They needn't have been as devout as Clerics or anything, simply have worshiped some god or another and done so without egregiously failing to follow their teachings (in which case their worship amounted to nothing but lip service, meaning they're judged Faithless). Those people are sent to their deity's realm to have whatever afterlife that god prepares for their followers.

The False are those who worshiped a deity, but consciously betrayed them. Those people are given a punishment in the City of the Dead appropriate to their betrayal - though I don't think any were ever really described in detail to give as examples.

The Faithless are those who worshiped no deity at all - not just actual atheists/agnostics (who are all but nonexistant in the Realms anyway), but anyone who never really did more than pay lip service to the gods. They are thrown in the Wall of the Faithless, which surrounds the City of the Dead, where their soul decays over the eons.

And yes, that last part is rather depressing, no two ways about it.

[KorvinStarmast]

Honestly, there's no many options for Tempest Clerics in the Realms outside of .
Yes. That's why I chose Thor, even though we are playing in FR, and my DM has ruled that there's a cult worshipping Thor in the Northern parts of Fearun. My guess is that Thor got some frequent flier miles on his Multiverse Express card a eon or so ago, visited Faerun, and made a good first impression on some of the Northern types. :smallbiggrin:

One of the signal shortcomings of FR (deities) has always been how hidebound the FR framework chose to be regarding the alignment matrix regarding deities. Shoehorning all of that into the matrix Gygax developed back in the 70's is understandable, but it misses the point about pantheons and mythologies and deity status in polytheistic settings.

[Naanomi]

I could see Shaundukal, Ulutiu, Valkar, some of the Utheric totems having Tempest. Also some of the Maztica gods (Azul, Eha) and Zakharan (Hajama); and non-human and Egyptian (mulhulorandi) pantheons in the PHB as well

[Kurt Kurageous]

Before you take a step further, ask your DM what Pantheons they are using. That will narrow the scope from the infinite (literally!) choice menu you currently confront...

[Ralanr]

I can't even find where the after life is described per diety.

Now I think my fiend dragonborn blade lock is going to need to pick a diety in the roll20 forgotten realms campaign.

[Naanomi]

Warlock probably doesn't have to worry about his post-death fate...

[Ralanr]

Warlock probably doesn't have to worry about his post-death fate...

Oh yeah...heh.

[Shining Wrath]

There's more than one way to do any of the alignments.

I have a character in my current campaign who is a Drow escaped from the Underdark and a bard. She lost everything because she loved her sister, who did not return the favor being evil.

As such, she's not evil, but she's what I'd call for want of a better word an anti-theist; based on her experiences with Lolth, she believes the gods are very real, and the world would be a whole lot better if said gods would simply leave mortals alone.

So that's a possibility for CN; someone who wishes the gods would take a long vacation.

[Ralanr]

There's more than one way to do any of the alignments.

I have a character in my current campaign who is a Drow escaped from the Underdark and a bard. She lost everything because she loved her sister, who did not return the favor being evil.

As such, she's not evil, but she's what I'd call for want of a better word an anti-theist; based on her experiences with Lolth, she believes the gods are very real, and the world would be a whole lot better if said gods would simply leave mortals alone.

So that's a possibility for CN; someone who wishes the gods would take a long vacation.

I'd imagine there should be a lot of those in fantasy settings. People who would prefer the divine and outsiders of any type would just stay out of the business of the material plane.

[rhouck]

Honestly, there's no many options for Tempest Clerics in the Realms outside of those three, either. Valkur could probably qualify, but he's an awfully niche deity (god of sailors an naval combat). Other than him? Um, Istishia or Akadi (water and air elemental deities) maybe? But they're distant and uncaring, and as a result their followings are tiny by comparison to most other deities.

Thanks for mentioning Valkur, that's a great one for my sailor tempest cleric! I had originally just been doing Tymora, figuring that she was a good catch-all for adventurers (especially at sea).

[Shining Wrath]

I'd imagine there should be a lot of those in fantasy settings. People who would prefer the divine and outsiders of any type would just stay out of the business of the material plane.

Would make for an interesting cleric; channeling the power of a god because you need the power to accomplish your goals, all while wishing no one could do so.

[Zevox]

Yes. That's why I chose Thor, even though we are playing in FR, and my DM has ruled that there's a cult worshipping Thor in the Northern parts of Fearun. My guess is that Thor got some frequent flier miles on his Multiverse Express card a eon or so ago, visited Faerun, and made a good first impression on some of the Northern types. :smallbiggrin:
*shrug* Why not? It's not like he'd be the first god from our world's mythologies to move into the Realms. Heck, he wouldn't even be the first from the Norse pantheon - Tyr beat him to that.


I can't even find where the after life is described per diety.
That's because it isn't. Too many deities, not enough reason to come up with specifics of the afterlife for each of them, I'd wager. Generally I'd assume that deities reward their followers in a manner appropriate to the deity in question - though for some of the evil gods that may not be the case I suppose. Who knows what a crazy god like Cyric might do with his dead worshipers?

[Naanomi]

For afterlife, read the specifics of the God's Divine Realm (various books talk about them through the editions) and realize you'll basically be hanging out there

[Ralanr]

For afterlife, read the specifics of the God's Divine Realm (various books talk about them through the editions) and realize you'll basically be hanging out there

I take it Tempus's bachelor pad is pretty much Valhalla?

[SharkForce]

I take it Tempus's bachelor pad is pretty much Valhalla?

dunno. he is also worshipped by the totally-not-mongols out in totally-not-asia that invaded totally-not-china, as one major example iirc.

[KorvinStarmast]

As such, she's not evil, but she's what I'd call for want of a better word an anti-theist; based on her experiences with Lolth, she believes the gods are very real, and the world would be a whole lot better if said gods would simply leave mortals alone.

So that's a possibility for CN; someone who wishes the gods would take a long vacation.
If you haven't read Moorcock's "Elric of Melnibone" stories I think you'll find a very good fit with this point of view. Also some of his other "Eeternal Champion" books and series. The God's are certainly there (Lords of Law and Lords of Chaos) but the mortals chafe no small amount at their interference in the mundane.

[Shining Wrath]

Yes, Elric came to the realization that the gods were not really concerned with individual mortals save as interesting tools. Arioch didn't treat him well at all.

[Naanomi]

That is sort of the mindset of the Athar in Planescape: that the Gods are just pretenders, powerful outsiders who exploit followers and have nothing to do with creating or sustaining reality; and if there are 'real Gods' in the planes they are far from mortal comprehension.

[Shining Wrath]

That is sort of the mindset of the Athar in Planescape: that the Gods are just pretenders, powerful outsiders who exploit followers and have nothing to do with creating or sustaining reality; and if there are 'real Gods' in the planes they are far from mortal comprehension.

Eh, we're taking the approach that the gods do in fact run their planes and have great power, just that they misuse it all to often (and remember her most direct experience of a deity is Lolth, who is sort of the poster child for abusive deity).

[KorvinStarmast]

Eh, we're taking the approach that the gods do in fact run their planes and have great power, just that they misuse it all to often (and remember her most direct experience of a deity is Lolth, who is sort of the poster child for abusive deity). I will confess to you that due to Lolth, and the fact that Brown recluses exist, and having played the giant/drow modules when they first came out, I have never played and will never play Nidalee in League of Legends. Just won't. Never. No. Don't ask me to during draft, it's not gonna happen. (EDIT: meant to say Elise, caught by shark).

Further that point, whenever we played Diablo II, I had a tendency to make sure we killed all spiders, even if it meant diverging from the next act checkpoint, so that all spiders die.

Likewise in Diablo III ... there's something about ridding the world of evil/possessed/anthroish spiders that is correct.

So what's our DM doing with our adventure? He's taking us into the underdark. (further comments redacted due to language)

[SharkForce]

I will confess to you that due to Lolth, and the fact that Brown recluses exist, and having played the giant/drow modules when they first came out, I have never played and will never play Nidalee in League of Legends. Just won't. Never. No. Don't ask me to during draft, it's not gonna happen.

Further that point, whenever we played Diablo II, I had a tendency to make sure we killed all spiders, even if it meant diverging from the next act checkpoint, so that all spiders die.

Likewise in Diablo III ... there's something about ridding the world of evil/possessed/anthroish spiders that is correct.

So what's our DM doing with our adventure? He's taking us into the underdark. (further comments redacted due to language)

nidalee is the cougar lady.

you're thinking of elise.

but yeah, can't argue with killing spiders. most critters are happy to just kill you and eat you if they need food, but that's not good enough for spiders, no sir. they have to trap you, bundle you up, inject you with a paralyzing venom that digests you from the inside out, then come back later after leaving you to be digested alive and suck your innards out.

i mean, i obviously don't *want* to get eaten by a jaguar or anything, but a critter's gotta eat, and i can respect that. spiders just go way too far though.

plus, the way they move is just icky.

[Ralanr]

Thus is why spiders are referred to as "Nope"

Damn it Tolkien. He just had to put in giant spiders.

It's the faces that get me the most. *shudders* I'm so glad my DM is arachnophobic, only because this means she'll never throw spiders at us.

[KorvinStarmast]

nidalee is the cougar lady. you're thinking of elise. You are correct, she really likes teenagers. Not sure where brain was there. Elise is the nono for me. Thanks.

[Shining Wrath]

I will confess to you that due to Lolth, and the fact that Brown recluses exist, and having played the giant/drow modules when they first came out, I have never played and will never play Nidalee in League of Legends. Just won't. Never. No. Don't ask me to during draft, it's not gonna happen. (EDIT: meant to say Elise, caught by shark).

Further that point, whenever we played Diablo II, I had a tendency to make sure we killed all spiders, even if it meant diverging from the next act checkpoint, so that all spiders die.

Likewise in Diablo III ... there's something about ridding the world of evil/possessed/anthroish spiders that is correct.

So what's our DM doing with our adventure? He's taking us into the underdark. (further comments redacted due to language)

I had a nice wolf spider encounter set up for my party ... but they rolled incredibly well and managed to track wood elves back to their village, and thus bypassed the spiders. So that means there are 5 giant wolf spiders roaming free, looking for victims.

[Ralanr]

I had a nice wolf spider encounter set up for my party ... but they rolled incredibly well and managed to track wood elves back to their village, and thus bypassed the spiders. So that means there are 5 giant wolf spiders roaming free, looking for victims.

You monster. XD

[Talderas]

Alignment isn't a concern, as long as it makes sense for your particular character to want to follow that god's teachings. Personally, I'd enforce some degree of alignment restriction for Clerics (perhaps not quite as stringent as the old one-step rule, but not far off either), but even that would be a house-rule. There are no alignment requirements on anything in 5e.*

The one-step rule was due to the cosmological "battle" between the various divine forces. It's not really a mechanical condition in the rules as much as a logical condition of the setting. Since characters with divine origins for their power received it directly from the deity and the deity provides those powers willingly it would not make sense for the deity to be providing power to individuals who are going to be contradictory to stances of the deity. Exceptions existed, like Sune (CG) allowing paladins (LG) to serve her, but they are just exceptions. If your D&D world is still operating under the basis that the character is receiving his power from the deity then the one-step rule should probably enforced.

If your character does not receive power directly from the deity then the one-step rule may be a guiding or influencing factor but shouldn't bar a character from worshipping a deity that doesn't closely match his alignment. To those individuals worshipping a deity that matches their personal philosophies is more appropriate, even if the alignment contradicts, simply because aspects of the deity's portfolio may be more apropos.

[Shining Wrath]

You monster. XD

The DM is the worst monster in the game. No creature in the MM has access to the special attack "Rocks fall, everybody dies".

BTW ... what's your passive perception?

[Ralanr]

The DM is the worst monster in the game. No creature in the MM has access to the special attack "Rocks fall, everybody dies".

BTW ... what's your passive perception?

Well. I have ADD.

Not sure if that makes it high or low.

[Shining Wrath]

Well. I have ADD.

Not sure if that makes it high or low.

It means you'll probably spot the spiders unless you're distracted by a squirrel.

[KorvinStarmast]

It means you'll probably spot the spiders unless you're distracted by a squirrel. A squirrel with long pointy teeth! :eek:

[Shining Wrath]

A squirrel with long pointy teeth! :eek:

That was a rabbit. A foul, cruel, and bad-tempered rodent.

[Zevox]

The one-step rule was due to the cosmological "battle" between the various divine forces. It's not really a mechanical condition in the rules as much as a logical condition of the setting. Since characters with divine origins for their power received it directly from the deity and the deity provides those powers willingly it would not make sense for the deity to be providing power to individuals who are going to be contradictory to stances of the deity. Exceptions existed, like Sune (CG) allowing paladins (LG) to serve her, but they are just exceptions. If your D&D world is still operating under the basis that the character is receiving his power from the deity then the one-step rule should probably enforced.
That's just the thing - I can imagine situations where the character receiving power from the god can be a bit more than one alignment step away from them, but it still makes sense. Such as chaotic good gods like Sune having 3e Paladins, or Oath of Devotion Paladins in 5e. Or possibly a chaotic good Cleric or Paladin serving a normally lawful good deity, who takes a slightly different approach to that deity's teachings, but close enough that the deity would still be fine with it. So I personally wouldn't be as stringent as a hard-and-fast one-step rule, but would require better explanations the further the divine caster was from their god's alignment.

Also, for what it's worth, Clerics getting their power from deities seems to be the only way it works in default 5e. The PHB description of Clerics refers to them as serving deities constantly, and never once mentions an alternative option. Individual DMs can rule otherwise, of course, but by the rules that's how it goes in this edition.

[KorvinStarmast]

Well. I have ADD.

Which edition? :smallsmile:

[j_spencer93]

Yes. That's why I chose Thor, even though we are playing in FR, and my DM has ruled that there's a cult worshipping Thor in the Northern parts of Fearun. My guess is that Thor got some frequent flier miles on his Multiverse Express card a eon or so ago, visited Faerun, and made a good first impression on some of the Northern types. :smallbiggrin:

One of the signal shortcomings of FR (deities) has always been how hidebound the FR framework chose to be regarding the alignment matrix regarding deities. Shoehorning all of that into the matrix Gygax developed back in the 70's is understandable, but it misses the point about pantheons and mythologies and deity status in polytheistic settings.

Actually you can worship Thor. In one book, a supplement in 3.5 i believe, it mentions pockets of real patrons in Faerun. So that isn't even a home rule. Long ago Faerun and our world were close, mages commonly taking people from ours as slaves.

[Kurt Kurageous]

Ask your DM what pantheons they are supporting. Mine is Greco-Roman plus all racial Gods. I don't deny the existence of other gods, just those are the ones that have taken an interest in my world called Ethis (as in "eh, this?").