Paladins with multiple gods?

[Johnny Krillers]

So as the post title says, what do you think of a paladin with more than one god? Didn't think of it till recently, but I haven't ever really heard of one who truly followed two different gods, whether they be of the same pantheon or not, but do you think it'd sound reasonable from a story and gameplay standpoint?

I personally think it's an interesting idea and only really considered it as I was making a dwarf who claimed Marthammor Duin as his patron due to his and his clan's general adventuring ways, but also offering prayers and asking guidance from Pelor, which felt right as an Oath of the Ancients follower, seeing as the sun lord is both old and an embodiment of light.

[Professor Gnoll]

Given that most worshippers of a pantheon wouldn't restrict themselves to one god, it makes perfect sense to worship multiple gods at once.

[Johnny Krillers]

Given that most worshippers of a pantheon wouldn't restrict themselves to one god, it makes perfect sense to worship multiple gods at once.

Sorry, meant within or out of a single given pantheon, edited original post to say so. Also I know they worship a pantheon in general, but I've only ever really played with paladins who while acknowledging and praying to a whole pantheon, really devoted themselves to a single deity, claiming themselves as a champion of X or a whole pantheon at once, I was wondering if it'd still make sense to just pick two or three as your go to gods instead of one or all.

[Gildedragon]

Also Paladins, at least 3.5 ones, are paragons of the abstract concepts of Good and Law above all (even with gods in play) except for some specific god-requiring / interventionist-gods settings. As such it is not unreasonable a paladin values Kord's emphasis on the body, fair combat, and courage, and worships Wee Jas's orderly, hierarchical rule, and her patience; St. Cuth's protector and humility aspects.
At the same time this paladin does not fully align with any of them. St. C is too dogmatic and uncaring for the general good (obedience above all), and Wee Jas is too vain and her necromantic aspects are too akin to Vecna or Nerull, and Kord is too chaotic, too brash and individualistic.
Together they can represent the ideals the paladin strives for, as well as cautionary tales as to what too much zeal in any one aspect can lead to.

[Knaight]

The whole D&D concept of a polytheistic pantheon where everyone picks one god and sticks to it is downright odd. It's a weird blend of polytheism and monotheism, and while it kind of works for certain cases (e.g. people who dedicate their lives to a particular temple or something, and thus disproportionately favor one god or another), it's essentially never a requirement for a type of character. A paladin that approaches a polytheistic pantheon with a polytheistic mindset really isn't odd, though for a pantheon which has a set of clear cut good gods and a set of clear cut evil gods there are likely restrictions on which ones are favored.

[Nerd-o-rama]

The whole D&D concept of a polytheistic pantheon where everyone picks one god and sticks to it is downright odd. It's a weird blend of polytheism and monotheism, and while it kind of works for certain cases (e.g. people who dedicate their lives to a particular temple or something, and thus disproportionately favor one god or another), it's essentially never a requirement for a type of character. A paladin that approaches a polytheistic pantheon with a polytheistic mindset really isn't odd, though for a pantheon which has a set of clear cut good gods and a set of clear cut evil gods there are likely restrictions on which ones are favored.

Believing in multiple gods and only worshipping one is called henotheism ("I worship one god but recognize others as equally valid, or as aspects of that god") or monolatry ("I worship one god and recognize the existence of others, but don't hold them as worthy of worship"), and it's a thing that exists, or certainly has existed, in real life. Due to the board rules I'm hesitant to get into examples, but you can wiki it.

That said, Paladins of both henotheist and polytheist faiths make perfect sense to me. What defines a Paladin is adherence to specific principles more than specific gods, and there's even plenty of examples in published D&D settings of Paladins of all stripes existing at the same time, albeit not necessarily "coexisting". Eberron, for example, has Monolatrous or Monotheist Paladins of the Silver Flame, Polytheistic Paladins of the Sovereign Host, Henotheistic Paladins of specific Sovereigns (specifically Dol Arrah), and even agnostic Paladins who focus on their national identity or mystery cult, or just try to uphold the general principles of Law and Good (although the latter aren't necessarily organized). Even in the Forgotten Realms, where deities are much more personally connected to the world (and, unlike Eberron, provably extant), you have Paladins who worship Torm, Tyr, or Helm individually, and other Paladins who worship the Triad as a group, all of whom (pragmatically) also recognize the existence of other gods and may or may not occasionally offer up obeisance, if not worship, to them as well.

[Geddy2112]

I will second the posters above, paladins are equally valid to be devoted to ideals and not just a deity or deities. If you uphold an ideal like law and good, then you are probably cool with gods who also holds those ideas in high regard.

Even breaking out of the 3.5 LG paladin, a 5E paladin(or maybe antipaladin/blackguard) that takes the oath of vengeance is probably going to favor deities that are down with vengeance.

Likewise, a paladin can worship different aspects of similar gods, or really be aligned with the tenants of a single deity. There is no wrong way, but paladins should be dedicated to something with a hell of a lot of conviction. Be it one god, a handful, an ideal, ideals, or just the paragon of law and goodness.

[LibraryOgre]

The Planescape Supplement "On Hallowed Ground" made specific allowances for clerics of a pantheon, and I don't see any reason this couldn't be applied to Paladins, as well. Specifically, the Knights of Solamnia in Dragonlance are quasi-Paladins somewhat devoted to three different deities (Paladine, Kiri-Jolith, and Habbakuk). In the Forgotten Realms, the Triad is three Lawful Good deities who have a close relation, so I could also see a paladin devoted to the three of them.

[Talakeal]

3.X RAW seems to imply you must select a single patron deity. Its weird, but that seems to be the rules. My last DM flat out forbid me to play a pantheistic character.

Also, it is a very common houserule in all d&d editions that a paladin gets their powers from their patron diety. It is so common that most players I have talked to assumed it was RAW.

Your character concept sounds fine to me and I would allow a polytheistic paladin, but the only correct answer is to ask your DM.

[Clistenes]

Since there can be godless paladins devoted to the concept of Goodness itself, I can't see why you couldn't have a polytheistic paladin. He or she would worship many Good deities, but would get his or her power from Good itself.

He could still ask the gods for help or receive quest from them. Why would gods waste a perfectly good paladin who can be sent to near-suicidal missions?

[wumpus]

Didn't Hector pray "Zeus and ye other gods"? Alignment would have tricky points, presumably "the gods" would center on good (and sufficiently lawful for a paladin). A paladin might only take orders from/pray to specific gods that were at least good and tend to return to just the lawful good ones. Non-good gods would probably just get some sort of lip-service as part of "the gods", but don't expect specific prayers nor running errands for them.

A lot depends on the Pantheon. I'd imagine that it would have to be be set up for such things.

[Slipperychicken]

D&D gods aren't Yahweh. They don't restrict their followers from worshiping other gods.


I'm okay with a soldier of faith devoting himself to a group of deities. Just try and think up a name for the group, and a semi-coherent ideology based on their teachings, including what to do when some of the gods would recommend different things. Also, you might want some kind of compromise holy symbol, which could be the symbol of the strongest deity in the group. Be sure to wear your faith proudly, saying stuff like "By the glory of the north gods!" or "Such is the will of the Olympians!".

[Gildedragon]

D&D gods aren't Yahweh. They don't restrict their followers from worshiping other gods.


I'm okay with a soldier of faith devoting himself to a group of deities. Just try and think up a name for the group, and a semi-coherent ideology based on their teachings, including what to do when some of the gods would recommend different things. Also, you might want some kind of compromise holy symbol, which could be the symbol of the strongest deity in the group. Be sure to wear your faith proudly, saying stuff like "By the glory of the north gods!" or "Such is the will of the Olympians!".

Or a collective sign like the altar from gabii, or a bunch of amulets or pendants or votive charms.

[Coidzor]

I prefer Paladins as being deity-independent for their powers and ethos, so I'm fine with them venerating multiple deities as would be appropriate in a polytheist society for most people.

I'd also be fine with them having a pantheon patron instead of an individual one, too.

[SirBellias]

In one of my games, since there were three paladins, I was going to have them pick one diety whose values they champion, and two others that they also know how to conduct the rights/rituals for. I think it would be interesting, provided they get out of the dungeon they're in alive... And we play more than one session....

[Pex]

It would be fine in Faerun where the Paladin can worship The Triad - Tyr, Torm, Ilmater, though for persnickety technicality I don't know if that's good enough for Kelemvor not to put you in his wall. Even if you are wall-bound I have confidence Tyr, Torm, or Ilmater would intervene and claim you as Kelemvor does permit deities to do for the wall-bound.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

A paladin serves good first, law second, a god third. As far was I'm concerned they can be just as pious following an entire pantheon, similarly themed gods from different pantheons ("because justice is the same everywhere, and I'm honored to call any god just enough to champion that cause my master") or even all the (good) gods.

In fact, I wouldn't be against a cleric following any other combination than just one god. It's a little more complicated fluff wise (where do those spells come from?), but it's kind of bizarre that a person could accept only one god as theirs in a world where all of them are undeniably real and influential (and many of them are objectively good).

[BWR]

Elizabeth Moon's "The Deed of Paksenarrion" features a paladin with (probably) multiple patrons. It's a damn good book and anyone who likes paladins (and those who don't) really should read it to see what is probably the best portrayal of a D&D-ish paladin in literature.

BECMI paladins did not need to stick to a single patron, but they were required to hook up with a Lawful (basically the BECMI version of LG) church to gain powers. There were churches of singular Immortals and churches of pantheons.

[Kelb_Panthera]

3.X RAW seems to imply you must select a single patron deity. Its weird, but that seems to be the rules. My last DM flat out forbid me to play a pantheistic character.

I can see how you -might- get that implication but the RAW explicitly -states- that you can choose not to worship a deity at all and still get divine magic as a cleric, druid, or paladin. Statement trumps implication.

There is also a bit in one of the eberron texts (take your grain of salt here) that specifies that you can, explicitly, worship a pantheon. Might've been something to the same effect elsewhere as well.

Also, it is a very common houserule in all d&d editions that a paladin gets their powers from their patron diety. It is so common that most players I have talked to assumed it was RAW.

Nothing wrong with houserules. I'm not fond of ones that reduce options, personally, but to each his own.

Your character concept sounds fine to me and I would allow a polytheistic paladin, but the only correct answer is to ask your DM.

I don't see any problem with it either.

[tomandtish]

It would be fine in Faerun where the Paladin can worship The Triad - Tyr, Torm, Ilmater, though for persnickety technicality I don't know if that's good enough for Kelemvor not to put you in his wall. Even if you are wall-bound I have confidence Tyr, Torm, or Ilmater would intervene and claim you as Kelemvor does permit deities to do for the wall-bound.

Not even sure that would be necessary, although they might come to argue over who claims him.

The Faithless firmly denied any faith or only gave lip service to the gods for most of their lives without truly believing. The False intentionally betrayed a faith they believed in and to which they had made a personal commitment. FGCR pg. 258

I have a vague memory that one of the things they clarified at one point was that being Faithless or False pretty much required pretty serious intent. Even a local farmer who prayed to several gods and never claimed one officially as a patron would still have a patron god as long as all of their prayers were sincere. Likewise a Paladin of the Triad would be OK assuming their worship was sincere. But when the time came they'd probably discover that they'd paid a little more attention to one than the other two.

Either that or all three get into a fight over who the Paladin goes with, which could also be fun....

[Coidzor]

They probably have a rotation set up.

Or they split the petitioner into three mini-petitioners. This is the D&D afterlife, after all. It's kinda borked by default.

[Slipperychicken]

They probably have a rotation set up.

Or they split the petitioner into three mini-petitioners. This is the D&D afterlife, after all. It's kinda borked by default.

Maybe they could trade lesser souls? The paladin might be worth 30 normal souls, so they might draw straws, agreeing that the god who gets him gives 10 normal-quality souls to the other two, and they call it even.

Kinda like breaking bills while ordering delivery, but with the fate of peoples' whole afterlives instead of paper currency.

[Pex]

Maybe they could trade lesser souls? The paladin might be worth 30 normal souls, so they might draw straws, agreeing that the god who gets him gives 10 normal-quality souls to the other two, and they call it even.

Kinda like breaking bills while ordering delivery, but with the fate of peoples' whole afterlives instead of paper currency.

Good gods would not trade in souls.

There might be a special Order of the Triad Afterlife that serves all three. All Triad Worshippers go there, beloved by all three deities.

They may let the Paladin Soul freely choose and Honest True no hurt feelings or animosity from the ones not chosen and always welcomed in their Heavenly Court. If the Paladin Soul just can't decide because he loves and worships all three with such a passion he can't bare to depart any, he defaults to Ilmater because he's suffering from the choice to be made.

[Coidzor]

More like divvying up souls like a party divides up party loot.

Like Rhaegar gets extra 10 gold while Bernice and Thullia both get a single 10 gp gem.

[Forrestfire]

In 3.5, at least, it's noted that even if you primarily worship one god, a great many people pray to multiple gods. Worshipping and drawing power from multiple gods is covered in Deities and Demigods, though few of the D&D pantheons allow it by RAW.

[Morty]

I do wonder why the idea that a paladin needs to serve a god became so firmly entrenched, despite the requirement being setting-specific.

[VoxRationis]

Such a character would be Link.

[Kelb_Panthera]

I do wonder why the idea that a paladin needs to serve a god became so firmly entrenched, despite the requirement being setting-specific.

I'd hazard it's a legacy thing. I've been led to believe that divine characers were tied much more closely to the gods in 2e than they are in 3e.

[Slipperychicken]

I do wonder why the idea that a paladin needs to serve a god became so firmly entrenched, despite the requirement being setting-specific.

They're supposed to be holy warriors in D&D, half their class features contain words like "divine" and "holy", they're classified as "divine spellcasters" depending on edition, they have the power to work miracles like those attributed to religious figures, and all that implies service to a supernatural force.

Also, the paladin was written to imitate characters like Sir Galahad, whose pure heart and devotion to the Christian God gave him the power to perform miracles. There are other characters who inspired the class, who are similar, but weren't directly powered by the supernatural, yet still received supernatural aid that was attributed to their faith. Gawain for instance was essentially powered by the sun (reaching peak strength around noon) and was also a great healer.


That said, I support the idea of paladins who aren't tied to supernatural figures. I'd be happy to see paladins whose power is unrelated to their virtue or faith. I would prefer that, as paladins would then be seriously tempted to turn their gifts to wicked ends, and the idea of a 'fallen paladin' would be more viable. 5th edition mostly supports the idea, and I like that.

[VoxRationis]

I'd hazard it's a legacy thing. I've been led to believe that divine characers were tied much more closely to the gods in 2e than they are in 3e.

Clerics were. Paladins were less so, being more focused around chivalry. It was kind of assumed that, being analogous to the most chivalrous of medieval knights, they would be pious in the faith of whatever was the closest Christianity-analogue to the setting, but that was just one part of the whole knightly package.