Pelor as a Warlock Patron

[CTurbo]

How should it look?

What would the 1st and 6th level features look like???

1st-3rd level spells?

[d20familiar]

Celestial as is?

[Amechra]

Celestial as is?

Nope, clearly a Fiend patron. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?443306-quot-Pelor-the-Burning-Hate-quot-(from-Wizards-forum))

[Chronos]

Yeah, the system isn't really designed for having different rules for every individual patron, any more than it has different rules for clerics of every individual god. In both cases, you have categories, and decide which one most closely matches the individual you're thinking of.

[Segev]

Celestial as is?

Pelor is very definitly a Celestial patron.

[Emongnome777]

Agreed in the Celestial patron abilities as-is. Would add that pact of the blade (non-finesse weapon) would go with his domain which includes physical strength.

[Callin]

Nope, clearly a Fiend patron. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?443306-quot-Pelor-the-Burning-Hate-quot-(from-Wizards-forum))

I do so love "The Burning Hate"

[Millstone85]

I do so love "The Burning Hate"Me too, insofar as I love the idea of an evil sun god.

But I don't really know Pelor, so it might be completely unfair to the character.

[MilkmanDanimal]

Any of them; a "patron" is a set of mechanical abilities with a certain flavor. Pelor is Sun, Light, Strength, and Healing. Celestial is easy. Fiend? All those abilities are the power of the sun; the THP are the power of the sun filling you, you Hurtle Through Sun, and so forth. Be creative enough, and Archfey, GOO, or Hexblade work.

Go with whatever sounds fun mechanically, and have some narrative creativity to make it work.

[Whiskeyjack8044]

I think a reflavored fiend would work just fine. Instead being hurled through hell, they are hurled through Pelor's realm of radiant light or even the sun. Dark ones luck is like a small divine intervention. In my world Pelor is also god of agriculture, so gaining HP from downed enemies represents the harvest.

[Envyus]

Me too, insofar as I love the idea of an evil sun god.

But I don't really know Pelor, so it might be completely unfair to the character.

He is basically standard good god.

[JackPhoenix]

It wouldn't. Gods don't have warlocks, they have clerics.

[Clistenes]

A LG Planetar serving Pelor could "hire" a talented LN character, giving them the powers of a Celestial Warlock. The character couldn't become a Pelorian priest due to their non-good alignment, but their talent and loyalty still make them a valuable ally and agent..

[Millstone85]

It wouldn't. Gods don't have warlocks, they have clerics.There is a precedent, although the god in question is also a demon.
Drow spellcasters who seek to devote themselves wholly to the Spider Queen sometimes walk the dark path of the arachnomancer. By offering up body and soul to Lolth, they gain tremendous power and a supernatural connection to the ancient spiders of the Demonweb Pits, channeling magic from that dread place. The drow arachnomancer is a 16th-level spellcaster with warlock spells, meaning Lolth gave them pact magic.


A LG Planetar serving Pelor could "hire" a talented LN character, giving them the powers of a Celestial Warlock. The character couldn't become a Pelorian priest due to their non-good alignment, but their talent and loyalty still make them a valuable ally and agent..Meanwhile, a good-aligned character who entered Pelor's priesthood, but did not receive the powers of a cleric, could catch the attention of that same planetar, and be offered to work under them. In the Pelorian hierarchy, this would make the character less than a cleric, but more than a mundane priest.

[DracoKnight]

There is a precedent, although the god in question is also a demon. The drow arachnomancer is a 16th-level spellcaster with warlock spells, meaning Lolth gave them pact magic.

I would also argue that most priests of Asmodeus are Fiend Warlocks with the Acolyte background.

[CTurbo]

I agree Celestial probably best fits the current options, but yeah a re-flavored Fiend was my first thought too.

I have a LG character with 3 levels of Fiend Warlock and he's currently looking for a way to get out of his "contract" and he's currently seeing a high level Cleric of Pelor to help.

The DM and I were trying to figure out the best way to make this happen whether or not to just remove the 3 levels of Warlock completely, change the Patron completely, or re-flavor the Fiend's powers.

Currently I'm leaning towards replacing the 3 Warlock levels with 3 levels of Light Cleric(of Pelor obv)

The DM suggested actually coming up with a potential homebrew Pelor Patron so that's why I asked.

[JackPhoenix]

I would also argue that most priests of Asmodeus are Fiend Warlocks with the Acolyte background.

Considering Asmodeus isn't a god anymore (and again), that sounds about right.

[Millstone85]

Considering Asmodeus isn't a god anymore (and again), that sounds about right.In SCAG, he is still very much a god, listed in the main pantheon table and given a description as such.

In the MM, it is said that Asmodeus is "the only creature in the Nine Hells with the powers of a lesser god", which leaves a bit more room for interpretation. To my annoyance, it is also blatantly false, since Tiamat is later said to have her realm on Avernus.

[Chronos]

Quoth Clistenes:

A LG Planetar serving Pelor could "hire" a talented LN character, giving them the powers of a Celestial Warlock. The character couldn't become a Pelorian priest due to their non-good alignment,...
Why couldn't a non-good character be a priest of Pelor? There's no such limitation in the 5e rules.

[SLOTHRPG95]

I agree Celestial probably best fits the current options, but yeah a re-flavored Fiend was my first thought too.

I have a LG character with 3 levels of Fiend Warlock and he's currently looking for a way to get out of his "contract" and he's currently seeing a high level Cleric of Pelor to help.

The DM and I were trying to figure out the best way to make this happen whether or not to just remove the 3 levels of Warlock completely, change the Patron completely, or re-flavor the Fiend's powers.

Currently I'm leaning towards replacing the 3 Warlock levels with 3 levels of Light Cleric(of Pelor obv)

The DM suggested actually coming up with a potential homebrew Pelor Patron so that's why I asked.

As it currently stands, Celestial already looks an awful lot like a blend between Life and Light, which are the two domains most associated with Pelor. If you wanted to make it more Pelor-specific, I'd just tweak Celestial rather than building something from scratch. I'd probably swap Flaming Sphere for Heat Metal, and probably Guardian of Faith for Death Ward, since a powerful disciple of Pelor should always be able to protect against death effects, no matter if they're a Warlock or a Cleric. Other than that, I'd leave the 1st-level and 6th-level abilities the same, probably give Resistance to radiant and necrotic damage at 10th, and then maybe steal Hurl Through Hell but have it (as suggested by someone above) be Sun-related instead of Hell-related, and do radiant/fire damage instead of psychic.


Why couldn't a non-good character be a priest of Pelor? There's no such limitation in the 5e rules.

There's no rules limitation, per se, but as a Cleric you're still getting your power from your deity. So if you're acting in ways that'd mark you as an evil character, chances are that Pelor won't grant you your powers for much longer. Not because of your alignment, but because of your actions that define that alignment, such as ignoring the suffering of the downtrodden, not healing the sick, not defending the innocent against undead, etc.

[8wGremlin]

It wouldn't. Gods don't have warlocks, they have clerics.

Clerics are just socially accepted Warlocks with a support network.
Their patrons are just greedy and won't share some of the cool spells.
- change my mind.

[JackPhoenix]

Clerics are just socially accepted Warlocks with a support network.
Their patrons are just greedy and won't share some of the cool spells.
- change my mind.

I can't, because I don't disagree. I'd prefer if clerics used pact magic, or even better, were warlock subclass...

[PhoenixPhyre]

I can't, because I don't disagree. I'd prefer if clerics used pact magic, or even better, were warlock subclass...

I don't understand this idea at all. The two are completely different, except that they have to do with getting power through other beings.

Clerics channel the will of their deity, with the deity acting through them to produce the effects. They can lose their powers if they oppose the will of the deity, and generally act as the direct agents of the god. In most cases they are chosen based on their extreme faith in the cause and power of the deity. They are chosen, they do not select themselves as empowered servants. They only have power to the degree that the deity approves of them. They gain power by getting closer to their deity and understanding its will better.

Warlocks seek out Patrons in search of arcane power (or brush across them accidentally and are forever changed by the experience). The contracts are frequently quid pro quo, with discrete "do this and you get that" clauses. Warlocks are not generally forever tethered to the Patron, although advancement is at the Patron's mercy. They cannot lose their spells and powers--once granted, they belong to the warlock. Warlocks choose, they are not chosen. Many, if not most, are not even that enthusiastic about the Patron's cause--they're there because they get/got paid to be there. They gain power by negotiating new contracts or by following spelled out clauses.

The two are completely different at their core.

I could definitely see Pelor (or any other god) doing Patron pacts as well as empowering clerics. The two serve different purposes. Warlocks are free lancers, hired for a job. Clerics are loyal employees, constantly on the god's errand. And not nearly everyone has the supernal faith required to be an actual cleric--even most of the priests aren't that way. Heck, in a kinda strange inversion, I could see a setting where most of the normal priests gain their powers in much more of a warlock-y way--specific deals for specific powers, rather than free access to a wide range of divine might.

[Laserlight]

My son played a drow Light cleric of "the Death God, Pelor". It made a certain sense, from a drow point of view...

[JackPhoenix]

Snip

Clerics can't lose power in 5e. They don't need to actively worship their deity at all. They can turn against their god, and... nothing will happen to them. They aren't paladins who can fall for breaking their oath.

Warlock advancement isn't "at the Patron's mercy".... you contradict yourself in the very next sentence. You'll get your first level in class, and then you can forgot your patron even exist (despite also getting boon from it at level 3).

There's little difference between "I'll worship you, and you grant me power (or "You're worshipping me? Here, have some power")" and "I'll do something you want, and you grant me power". Clerics can be chosen without caring for their god at all, and warlocks can be granted power without any deals. Specifics are up to the patron. Hell, "Sometimes the relationship between warlock and patron is like that of a cleric and a deity, though the beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are not gods. A warlock might lead a cult dedicated to a demon prince, an archdevil, or an utterly alien entity—beings not typically served by clerics."... straight from PHB.

But fluff isn't that important, it's the mechanics: Pact magic fits clerics much better than standard spellcasting. Warlocks always cast spells at the highest power they can handle, and clerics channel power of their god... why should they get to decide if they want to use that power from level 1 slot, or level 3 slot, or whatever? Kinda contradictory to "a god acting through them". Also, warlock has more moving parts, and thus allow for more customization... Channel Divinity would make for good pact boon, and invocations would allow to better fit with the deity in question and the purpose it's got for the servant.

[Sigreid]

I'd make him celestial. And there's no reason a God couldn't make a pact if he wants to. Maybe he doesn't believe in the character enough for a full cleric investment.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Clerics can't lose power in 5e. They don't need to actively worship their deity at all. They can turn against their god, and... nothing will happen to them. They aren't paladins who can fall for breaking their oath.


Uh...what? Sure, it doesn't give explicit mechanics for it, but to say otherwise is to deny a whole chunk of D&D fiction.



Warlock advancement isn't "at the Patron's mercy".... you contradict yourself in the very next sentence. You'll get your first level in class, and then you can forgot your patron even exist (despite also getting boon from it at level 3).


Any reasonable interpretation requires pact involvement to increase in levels.



There's little difference between "I'll worship you, and you grant me power (or "You're worshipping me? Here, have some power")" and "I'll do something you want, and you grant me power". Clerics can be chosen without caring for their god at all, and warlocks can be granted power without any deals. Specifics are up to the patron. Hell, "Sometimes the relationship between warlock and patron is like that of a cleric and a deity, though the beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are not gods. A warlock might lead a cult dedicated to a demon prince, an archdevil, or an utterly alien entity—beings not typically served by clerics."... straight from PHB.


There's a huge difference. And sometimes doesn't mean usually. Clerics must always be granted power based on faith. Warlocks might be granted such.



But fluff isn't that important, it's the mechanics: Pact magic fits clerics much better than standard spellcasting. Warlocks always cast spells at the highest power they can handle, and clerics channel power of their god... why should they get to decide if they want to use that power from level 1 slot, or level 3 slot, or whatever? Kinda contradictory to "a god acting through them". Also, warlock has more moving parts, and thus allow for more customization... Channel Divinity would make for good pact boon, and invocations would allow to better fit with the deity in question and the purpose it's got for the servant.

No. Fluff is the only thing that's important. Mechanics are fundamentally meaningless, fluff is the only thing that really matters.

[Millstone85]

Clerics can't lose power in 5e. They don't need to actively worship their deity at all. They can turn against their god, and... nothing will happen to them. They aren't paladins who can fall for breaking their oath.
Uh...what? Sure, it doesn't give explicit mechanics for it, but to say otherwise is to deny a whole chunk of D&D fiction.Including at least one important bit of D&D fiction from the current edition.


The spells of clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers are called divine magic. These spellcasters' access to the Weave is mediated by divine power--gods, the divine forces of nature, or the sacred weight of a paladin's oath.A cleric who lost their god's support would be cut from the Weave, as surely as a paladin who broke their oath.

[Kane0]

Pelor the Benevolent Sun is Celestial patron
Pelor the Burning Hate is Fiend patron

For extra fun also include Light, Life and maybe War clerics in the same gathering.

[SLOTHRPG95]

Pelor the Benevolent Sun is Celestial patron
Pelor the Burning Hate is Fiend patron

For extra fun also include Light, Life and maybe War clerics in the same gathering.

If there's a few War clerics, maybe there's even a few Nature clerics? I always viewed him as having agriculture-related interests, and there's really no other domain that allows one of his clerics to bless the harvest.

[JackPhoenix]

Uh...what? Sure, it doesn't give explicit mechanics for it, but to say otherwise is to deny a whole chunk of D&D fiction.

And as there are no rules to support it, the fiction is just that: fiction. Meaningless.


Any reasonable interpretation requires pact involvement to increase in levels.

There's nothing reasonable about imposing extra restrictions without any support anywhere in the books.


There's a huge difference. And sometimes doesn't mean usually. Clerics must always be granted power based on faith. Warlocks might be granted such.

Unless there's no god to "grant" them that power involved in the process of becoming a cleric. Clerics of forces and philosophies are a thing. The core is the same: both clerics and warlocks gets their power from external source. Precise details of what the source is and what the relationship with the character is is mutable and irrelevant.


No. Fluff is the only thing that's important. Mechanics are fundamentally meaningless, fluff is the only thing that really matters.

Not really. You may have noticed that fluff changes according to setting you play in, but the mechanics stay the same. Fluff *is* meaningless, unless it's actually supported by the rules.


Including at least one important bit of D&D fiction from the current edition.

A cleric who lost their god's support would be cut from the Weave, as surely as a paladin who broke their oath.

[citation needed]. There's nothing suggesting that the god can somehow cease to support the cleric, anymore than warlock's patron can prevent the warlock from doing whatever he wants (outside of murder or similar direct intervention). Once you take 1st level in any class, you're set, unless you're paladin.

[Hobbo Jim]

Any reasonable interpretation requires pact involvement to increase in levels.



This is kind of a sweeping statement... What if the pact involved giving the warlock a spark of power, which the warlock then fosters over the course of their lifetime, as a sorcerer or druid might.

I am inclined to agree with the cleric point though, since they're supposed to pray each morning for spells (that's still a thing in this edition, right?)

[Millstone85]

[citation needed]. There's nothing suggesting that the god can somehow cease to support the clericThe PHB quote that I provided does suggest this. All the god has to do is stop giving the cleric access to the Weave.


I am inclined to agree with the cleric point though, since they're supposed to pray each morning for spells (that's still a thing in this edition, right?)Technically, no, but there is something similar.


You can change your list of prepared spells when you finish a long rest. Preparing a new list of cleric spells requires time spent in prayer and meditation: at least 1 minute per spell level for each spell on your list.

[JackPhoenix]

The PHB quote that I provided does suggest this. All the god has to do is stop giving the cleric access to the Weave.

Except there's nothing suggesting the god can actually do that. And you can be atheist cleric, and still get the same abilities as any other cleric, without any divine involvement.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Except there's nothing suggesting the god can actually do that. And you can be atheist cleric, and still get the same abilities as any other cleric, without any divine involvement.

That's something I'd need citation for, all of the evidence I can find in the Cleric class says that a divine power chooses them, grants them divine magic for a divine purpose.

Something divine has to be involved (nature itself is considered a divine power), otherwise you're not a Cleric but a very snooty Wizard with a habit for casting prestidigitation when he stitches up your wounds with a very mundane medical bag.

My faith in all things that may or may not be has given me powers unknown to many men, observe as I turn your skin green to facilitate the natural healing of this poultice I made from medicinal herbs. It's very magical healing, I assure you.

Maybe I'm just reading too hard into your use of "divine intervention" here. It could be the fact that Divine is used to describe their: divine domain, channel divinity, and their very literal Divine Intervention ability.

[NNescio]

Except there's nothing suggesting the god can actually do that. And you can be atheist cleric, and still get the same abilities as any other cleric, without any divine involvement.

You would lose access to Divine Intervention, right? No deity to intervene.

That aside I agree that clerics (atheist or otherwise) aren't technically dependent on deities for continual access to their other class features.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Except there's nothing suggesting the god can actually do that. And you can be atheist cleric, and still get the same abilities as any other cleric, without any divine involvement.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. You can't say that "no specified mechanic" ==> "action is impossible", otherwise you'd say that characters can't relieve themselves (because there's no mechanic for that).

Mechanics are a partial implementation of the fiction. They do not constrain the fiction in any sensible way. The fiction constrains the mechanics, and overrides them whenever there's a conflict. That's the basic rule of 5e, unlike 3e. The PHB does not form a contract with the players--it merely sets out a few defaults. And those defaults are mutable. And in this particular case (clerics "falling from grace"), it's something that needs to be negotiated between the player and the DM--it will vary not only on a setting level but on a deity-to-deity and situation-to-situation basis. So providing specific mechanics would cause lots of problems without solving any.

As a note, clerics of "forces and philosophies" are not the default. They're specifically a variant, optional setting for DMs to enable. More than that, clerics of such forces/philosophies are just as bound as clerics of deities--if they break faith, they lose power.

[elosga]

Well! Gods don't seem to have the warlocks, they have war clerics.

[Millstone85]

Except there's nothing suggesting the god can actually do that.How could the god not be able to do that? Has every cleric become a ur-priest or something?

In the case of the warlock, which the same sidebar defines as an arcane spellcaster, meaning they directly manipulate the Weave, we have to assume that something lasting was given to the character, like secret knowledge and/or a shot of sorcerous essence. So it is doubtful that the patron could later extract that out of the warlock.

But a cleric's continued connection to the Weave is dependent on their god.


And you can be atheist cleric, and still get the same abilities as any other cleric, without any divine involvement.The cleric of a philosophy, who may or may not deny the existence of the gods, would have it even worse. A god could decide to keep granting spells to a cleric whose faith is faltering, because, say, the god thinks the cleric's heart is still in the right place. But what happens when a cleric loses faith in a philosophy? Do they somehow remain attuned to it? I don't think so.

[ProsecutorGodot]

And in this particular case (clerics "falling from grace"), it's something that needs to be negotiated between the player and the DM--it will vary not only on a setting level but on a deity-to-deity and situation-to-situation basis. So providing specific mechanics would cause lots of problems without solving any.

This can apply to Warlocks as well. This is only one example but for the Critical Role campaign Matthew Mercer has treated Warlocks in much the same way. Disobeying your patron won't just end in you losing your powers, they're going to make punishing you for betraying them a personal goal. I personally kind of like that mentality, it works especially well when the Warlock in question has made an open ended agreement.

On one hand I'm happy that the default doesn't set out explicit rules to punish players for not always working towards their "power provider" (oath, patron, deity) but on the other I prefer for characters to use those tools to further their characters motivations. It irks me a bit when someone expects to be a Cleric/Warlock/Paladin and ignore those aspects of the class (one of the reasons that the description for Hexblades causes me grief). I understand though that not everyone shares that mentality and in my experience it's easier to add such rules for your own table than it is to remove/change them.

[PhoenixPhyre]

This can apply to Warlocks as well. This is only one example but for the Critical Role campaign Matthew Mercer has treated Warlocks in much the same way. Disobeying your patron won't just end in you losing your powers, they're going to make punishing you for betraying them a personal goal. I personally kind of like that mentality, it works especially well when the Warlock in question has made an open ended agreement.

Yeah. I can totally see a Patron doing this. It's just not nearly as automatic as a divinity withdrawing their protection and favor from a cleric. It requires the Patron to send out minions to smack down the offender. On the other hand, I'd guess that most GOO and Archfey patrons are less interested in such things. Their contracts are of a different nature than a fiend (especially a devil) pact.



On one hand I'm happy that the default doesn't set out explicit rules to punish players for not always working towards their "power provider" (oath, patron, deity) but on the other I prefer for characters to use those tools to further their characters motivations. It irks me a bit when someone expects to be a Cleric/Warlock/Paladin and ignore those aspects of the class (one of the reasons that the description for Hexblades causes me grief). I understand though that not everyone shares that mentality and in my experience it's easier to add such rules for your own table than it is to remove/change them.

I agree that not having defaults for this is a good default. When I have "bound" characters (which includes druids as a note, at least for me), I try to make it a point to talk to the player and work out what their "binding" is. What's their Oath (specifics, not generalities)? What would their god expect[1]? What is their relationship with their Patron, and who is it[2]? How do they relate to the nature spirits with whom druids make short-term deals for specific spells[3]?

[1] I don't do forces and philosophies. Being a cleric means you were chosen by one of the 16 members of the Celestial Congregation and your identity was entered into the Great Mechanism, granting you limited access to that stream of power, mediated by your sponsoring deity (who can revoke access at any time).
[2] I have examples of patrons, but am willing to build one that matches what they're going for.
[3] My conception of druids is that they're surrounded by a swarm of minor (and not-so-minor) spirits with which they've made "deals"--I'll feed you this bit of energy if you'll channel <spell> through me or grant me your power (for wildshaping). More like a pet trainer with a bunch of semi-trained, mostly wild animals that hang around for treats. Druid spell-casting looks more like feeling the will of these alien minds and channeling their promptings through him. Some druids are more the "commander" type, bending the spirits to their will; others are more leaves moved by the wind of the spirits' wills.

[JackPhoenix]

Snip

Snip

"The cleric's class features often refer to your deity. lf you are devoted to a pantheon, cosmic force, or philosophy, your cleric features still work for you as written. Think of the references to a god as references to the divine thing you serve that gives you your magic." -XGtE, p.18.

Also, DMG, p.13... too long to quote the whole text.

Also, this SA (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/02/10/i-have-a-player-who-insists-on-playing-an-atheist-cleric/).


Mechanics are a partial implementation of the fiction. They do not constrain the fiction in any sensible way. The fiction constrains the mechanics, and overrides them whenever there's a conflict. That's the basic rule of 5e, unlike 3e.

Fiction doesn't override mechanics. I may say I cut someone's head off with a single swipe of my sword, but mechanics says I make attack and do appropriate damage, which may, but most likely won't, lead to the target's death.


The PHB does not form a contract with the players--it merely sets out a few defaults. And those defaults are mutable. And in this particular case (clerics "falling from grace"), it's something that needs to be negotiated between the player and the DM--it will vary not only on a setting level but on a deity-to-deity and situation-to-situation basis. So providing specific mechanics would cause lots of problems without solving any.

In which case you're in the realm of houserules, and thus irrelevant to the discussion. Not that the discussion of default fluff for cleric and warlock is relevant to entirely theoretical class that would cover both warlock and cleric's mechanical functions, and would have its own fluff in the first place.


As a note, clerics of "forces and philosophies" are not the default. They're specifically a variant, optional setting for DMs to enable. More than that, clerics of such forces/philosophies are just as bound as clerics of deities--if they break faith, they lose power.

They are not the typical case, but they are *not* a variant. Just like warlock who's got cleric-like relationship to their patron may not be the typical case, but explicitly exist without being a variant.


How could the god not be able to do that? Has every cleric become a ur-priest or something?

In the case of the warlock, which the same sidebar defines as an arcane spellcaster, meaning they directly manipulate the Weave, we have to assume that something lasting was given to the character, like secret knowledge and/or a shot of sorcerous essence. So it is doubtful that the patron could later extract that out of the warlock.

But a cleric's continued connection to the Weave is dependent on their god.

Gods aren't all-powerful. Maybe that's why they're more picky on who they choose than warlock patrons... they are just as unable to end the contract as warlock patrons are, but they've asked for continued service instead of one-off trade of whatever. Unless they are chaotic god who turned some random schmuck into cleric just for fun.

Or some other deity replaces them as the service provider, even without the cleric's knowledge (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2019/06/26/is-there-a-case-in-which-clerics-have-had-their-patron-deity-die-but-still-receive-cleric-abilities/). Note that this is FR, which is even more riddiculously dependant on gods than the default setting.


The cleric of a philosophy, who may or may not deny the existence of the gods, would have it even worse. A god could decide to keep granting spells to a cleric whose faith is faltering, because, say, the god thinks the cleric's heart is still in the right place. But what happens when a cleric loses faith in a philosophy? Do they somehow remain attuned to it? I don't think so.

The concept or force doesn't cease to exist when the cleric lose faith. And you may note that paladins get magic BEFORE they take any oath....

[Millstone85]

Gods aren't all-powerful.What is being discussed here is a far cry from a display of omnipotence. The god has been doing something for the cleric. The god just has to stop doing it.


The concept or force doesn't cease to exist when the cleric lose faith.So? The cleric still wouldn't remain attuned to that philosophy or force.

Say you have a cleric of beauty, especially inner beauty that has been expressed on the outside. After an encounter with a hag, the cleric is now convinced that everyone is ugly on the inside and any appearance of the contrary is just that, appearance. You think that cleric would still be empowered by their old philosophy?

Or a cleric of nature itself who, for some reason, now goes full Captain Pollution. Can they still call upon the forces of the fauna and the flora?

[GreyBlack]

How should it look?

What would the 1st and 6th level features look like???

1st-3rd level spells?

Just take the Fiend and roll from there. Pelor is a neutral evil deity after all.

[ProsecutorGodot]

"The cleric's class features often refer to your deity. lf you are devoted to a pantheon, cosmic force, or philosophy, your cleric features still work for you as written. Think of the references to a god as references to the divine thing you serve that gives you your magic." -XGtE, p.18.

Also, DMG, p.13... too long to quote the whole text.

Also, this SA (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/02/10/i-have-a-player-who-insists-on-playing-an-atheist-cleric/).

Just keep in mind that you're discussing very optional and explicitly non-default assumptions here. XGtE is not a core rulebook (it says so in the Introduction), the DMG makes clear that the idea of Ideas and Philosophies is a seperate variant that a DM can choose to use for their own game setting and Chris Perkins (as much as I love the man) has a very unique perspective and what he says should only be taken as advice and not the entire truth.

Gods being the ones who grant divine power is the first core assumption that the rules (both under the Cleric's page in the PHB and in the DMG) tell us is a default expectation of 5e.

Healers and Warriors
Divine magic, as the name suggests, is the power of the gods, flowing from them into the world. Clerics are conduits for that power, manifesting it as miraculous effects. The gods don’t grant this power to everyone who seeks it, but only to those chosen to fulfill a high calling.


Core Assumptions
The rules of the game are based on the following core assumptions about the game world.

Gods Oversee the World. The gods are real and embody a variety of beliefs, with each god claiming dominion over an aspect of the world, such as war, forests, or the sea. Gods exert influence over the world by granting divine magic to their followers and sending signs and portents to guide them. The follower of a god serves as an agent of that god in the world. The agent seeks to further the ideals of that god and defeat its rivals. While some folk might refuse to honor the gods, none can deny their existence.

When I come into a discussion on these forums, I try to approach my answers making as few assumptions as possible. That means I reference only what is accepted as the default (Gods rule the world, Dragons fly, beastmaster sucks, etc) unless I'm given an inclination to work past those ideas.

Many worlds are different, we can see that PhoenixPhyre has developed a pretty unique (and very interesting) one that separates itself greatly from many default assumptions, but it's made clear when he discusses it that he also understands what those core assumptions are. It's better, in my eyes, to make the difference clear and encourage others to find the version they like most.

Some worlds may have Clerics who can worship an idea or philosophy for their power. In those worlds where your faith is the gateway to power I would be even more inclined to treat it as something that can be severed. A DM could just as easily say "That doesn't work in my world, Divine Magic can only be accessed through the Gods". In the end it's the DM at your table that decides where anything comes from.

[JackPhoenix]

Snip

Now, here's the funny thing: Cleric's entry in the PHB tells you to pick your deity from the options listed in appendix B (and that the GM can tell you what gods are appropriate in the campaign).

Appendix B includes 2 philosophies, 2 religions based on ancestral worship, 1 thing that is listed as deity, but definitely isn't, and 1 "religion" that's collective name for a bunch of mad cults that worship all kind of stuff. All with domains their clerics get.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Now, here's the funny thing: Cleric's entry in the PHB tells you to pick your deity from the options listed in appendix B (and that the GM can tell you what gods are appropriate in the campaign).

Appendix B includes 2 philosophies, 2 religions based on ancestral worship, 1 thing that is listed as deity, but definitely isn't, and 1 "religion" that's collective name for a bunch of mad cults that worship all kind of stuff. All with domains their clerics get.

What are these philosophies and such that you're referencing? If you're talking about setting specific examples, again, those aren't going to be true for everyone. In Eberron I can see that there is a philosophy based source of divine power but that doesn't mean anything if your DM has chosen Forgotten Realms as their baseline.

The base assumption is that Gods grant the power, a specific setting can create exceptions. Eberron is a very unique exception, which Pelor (the topic of conversation) is notably absent from. We can even widen the net with certain Nonhuman gods who transcend multiple settings, but they only connect Forgotten Realms to Greyhawk.

If I recall Eberron is intentionally very separated from other settings in whatever cosmology is being used nowadays. It's magic is so different in both Divine, Natural and Arcane use that I'd almost consider it offensive to say that it should be applied generally to other settings. It's one of the many charming features that Eberron has.

So let's look at the Greyhawk example where Pelor is present:

The gods of Greyhawk come from at least four different pantheons, representing the faiths of the various ethnic groups that populated the continent of Oerik over the ages. As a result, there’s a great deal of overlap in their portfolios: Pelor is the Flan god of the sun and Pholtus is the Oeridian sun god, for example.

Looking through the list of Greyhawk deities, no mention of Philosophy and each example god is definitely real, a god, and not an idea.

So I'll repeat: It is possible in some settings for Cleric's to gain power from their belief in an idea or philosophy. That is not a core assumption in the rules however, the core assumption is that a very real god is granting mediated access to this magic.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Nope, clearly a Fiend patron. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?443306-quot-Pelor-the-Burning-Hate-quot-(from-Wizards-forum))

I was hoping this would be there.

This is one of the greatest conspiracies in D&D history.

[SLOTHRPG95]

Now, here's the funny thing: Cleric's entry in the PHB tells you to pick your deity from the options listed in appendix B (and that the GM can tell you what gods are appropriate in the campaign).

Appendix B includes 2 philosophies, 2 religions based on ancestral worship, 1 thing that is listed as deity, but definitely isn't, and 1 "religion" that's collective name for a bunch of mad cults that worship all kind of stuff. All with domains their clerics get.


What are these philosophies and such that you're referencing? If you're talking about setting specific examples, again, those aren't going to be true for everyone. In Eberron I can see that there is a philosophy based source of divine power but that doesn't mean anything if your DM has chosen Forgotten Realms as their baseline.


Let's see, we have... the Blood of Vol and the Path of Light as our two philosophies, the Undying Court and the Spirits of the Past as our two ancestor worship religions, the Silver Flame as the thing that's definitely not a deity, and the Cults of the Dragons Below as the collection of mad cults. So yes, those are indeed all from Eberron. Outside of Eberron, but keeping to the PHB, the closest we get to "Clerics that don't worship/get their power from deities" would be Druids and/or Warlocks. Bonus points to Druids for (a) not requiring any patron, deity or not (except in certain settings like Forgotten Realms), and (b) being lumped together with Cleric as a Priest/divine caster in previous editions.