[5E] Towards a new, better campaign setting.

[Lago PARANOIA]

You know what? Let's not talk about alignment for right now even though I have a lot of things that I want to say to Orca/CG/MfA. It'd just derail the thread and we weren't even a page in.

Please guys?

[Sashi]

One of the hardest things to do with a campaign setting, I think, is to try and incorporate all the different races. Even restricting yourself to the PHB races gives an enormous number of choices. Between making one race "dominant" and having all others be little pockets in different places, or letting every "kingdom" include all races and having a strong vein of nationalism ("It doesn't matter that we're an Orc, a Gnome, and a Sentient Ball of Plasma, we've got to save our nation!").

I think it's actually worse when there's a "monster country" that has all the orcs and goblinoids, as if they're united in their ugliness.

Instead of kingdoms or nations, there should be 3-5 "seats of power", castles that command strategic positions (big port, central crossroads, only pass through the mountains, big rock on the plains) that compete for territory and are constantly changing leadership, so the King of the High Rock could be an Elf, Orc, Halfling, or Sentient Ball of Plasma, but all the Halfling Outriders care is that sometimes the King on the High Rock gets a bug up his ass for charging them tribute.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Frank, no matter how much you try to dodge this, you just know that we need to have Dracula as a deity.

You cannot escape your destiny.

[Username17]

Frank, no matter how much you try to dodge this, you just know that we need to have Dracula as a deity.

You cannot escape your destiny.

No. I agree that you have to have Dracula in the setting, but you also have to have him be an actual dude in an actual castle that you can actually stab in the chest. Having Dracula be king of vampires is fine. Having Dracula be a power source that players can get their class features from is stupid.

One of the hardest things to do with a campaign setting, I think, is to try and incorporate all the different races. Even restricting yourself to the PHB races gives an enormous number of choices.

Oh, biologically there is just no way in hell for any world to sustain the number of sapient races that D&D posits. Let alone a world which is as war torn and disaster prone as a D&D landscape. But it makes for fun adventures and people like it. So, whatever.

A substantial advantage to leveraging WotC's Magic properties is that they already have the world divided up into five countries that have apparent racial makeups. The Plains Country appears to have Catfolk and Loxodons in addition to humans, and also use hippogriffs, gryphons, pegasi, and giant hawks as mounts and stuff. The Swamp Country appears to have Goblins and Undead in addition to humans, and also uses insects, giant rats, and even oozes to do stuff.

-Username17

[Zinegata]

Goblins are traditionally Red, rather than Black (Lorwyn is an exception). It's more common to find undead (intelligent and not) in Black.

Blue is the domain of Merfolk and wizardly types. Green's iconic race are the elves.

The only thing missing from Magic (from the iconic races) are Dwarves. They used to be in Red, but they haven't shown up anywhere in any Magic set for a long, long time. The problem probably lies with conflicting themes - Dwarves are mountainfolk, but Red is the color of chaos and barbarian lords.

[cthulhu]

Dwarves should be like artifacts.

[K]

I think DnD has never decided what kinds of gods it wanted, and so never had a model of what gods made sense in any setting.

The options are:

-1. Clash of the Titans/Xena Warrior Princess gods where you literally can beat them up and they are essentially just high level characters who are so powerful they can hear when people pray to them and sometimes they show up to display their more than mortal powers. At his point you have a pantheon for each nation/culture, and occasional cross-pantheon or inter-pantheon fights as well as permanent promotions and demotions to god status.

-2. RL-type gods where they never actually do anything in the setting but are prayed to and various people claim to get powers from. At this point you can have a god per village and even various gods per location (Wild God of Blackwood Forest, Saint Barth of the High Road between Corymunth and Falasia) as well as pantheons for cultures and nations because gods are just ideas and have no power beyond that.

In this model various beings claim to be gods but they are on par or weaker than various heroes.

-3. The unworkable option of the "one mythology is real" option where Mystra really does control all the magic and if you worship someone like Boccob in Forgotten Realms you are angering an actual objective ruler of that aspect of your reality. The is the option where you lose both enemies you can fight AND you lose the kitchen-sink fun of encountering new cultures.

This is basically the Old Testament view of gods where various gods compete and each individual person is supposed to only believe on one god who is his patron.

[Aryxbez]

The new campaign setting should have an easy-to-grok history and geography.

Agreed, I do think something like the whole elemental, or 5 "colors" sounds good. Could even have it cultural like how you have your "Norse/Barbarian" place, Roman-esque "empire", Knights/templars kingdom, Steam-punk city, and what not.

So it sounds like there should be 5 Major Kingdoms, and then a "other places to be from" as Frank mentioned, summarizing foreign places players could have their characters to be from. Reminds me much of the Great Clans in Rokugan, and then you have your minor clans that PC's might want to play, or the foreign kingdoms elsewhere.

The new campaign setting should have an easy-to-grok pantheon of gods.

Well from the initial list, as Zinegata was mentioning on recognition, I didn't know a few of those gods, not being too knowledgeable on deities beyond Norse, and Greek. However, I do really like the idea of Hades being a good deity, and being a rival with Dracula? Hell yeah, something like that does sound rather refreshing, except I would want someone like Dracula capable of being harmed by the PC's.

Oh, and Tezcatlipoca a two time world destroyer? I say put keep him on the list there.

As for Alignment, as crazy as it is to say, I've liked the base 9 alignments D&D has had. Although it seems based on my group, they don't care for it too much, or just go with some kind of mix of Neutrality, or Chaotic. What about FantasyCraft's idea they had for it? How it dealt with Law/Chaos, Good/Evil stuff, but also other things like a Barbarian honor code, or Chivalry, and so forth. It was just something that seemed interesting at the time, however I did like the idea of how Priests were based off of that kind of thing, since it also dealt with deities as well.

As for the technological level, White Knight Chronicles, was a game with a Steampunk-esque city, where it had this Colossal monster carrying the city on its back.

Oh, and I support "option 1 Clash of the Titans/Xena Warrior Princess" kind of gods, this way, you could still have Dracula as a deity, and later on allow the Players to have the satisfaction of getting to murder him someday.

[Maj]

Random idea...

If you have cleric specialties - like 3.0 domains - have those be the gods. Life, death, magic, (doing things the old fashioned way?), whatever... And have the iconic D&D gods be previous characters who exemplify one of those (or a convergence of the two).

I suppose that since it doesn't make sense for Erythnul to be a cleric, maybe the "domain" system could be a replacement for alignment... You're a fighter who has the friendship domain? You can cast heroe's feast at will. Or something.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Hell yeah, something like that does sound rather refreshing, except I would want someone like Dracula capable of being harmed by the PC's.

Dracula should be an on-and-off deity. Like sometimes Hades actually beats his ass down but doesn't finish him off and he's brought down to 'face stabbing' distance. So his clerics--wanting to keep their power--and his undead/monster mash hordes--not wanting oblivion--undergo wacky Scooby Doo plans to make him ascend to godhood again. During one of the occasions where he's planning to ascend to godhood again, the PCs can bust into his castle Belmont style and kill him for god. Then there's a huge hole in the pantheon and Tezcatlipoca and Ares and other morally ambiguous deities attempt to take over.

It's fanfic at its purest, but I LIKE fanfic.

But anyway, I don't like the 'status quo' of deityhood where it's implied that teh gods get their position for eternity. I honestly think that sometimes gods should be kicked off of their throne and replaced and/or someone ascends and things are in flux while they try to accommodate this upstart. The pantheon should have one adjustment to its rosters every generation I think.

[Parthenon]

Random idea...

If you have cleric specialties - like 3.0 domains - have those be the gods. Life, death, magic, (doing things the old fashioned way?), whatever... And have the iconic D&D gods be previous characters who exemplify one of those (or a convergence of the two).

Hmmm... so gods are more like titles or thrones of power or whatever. For example if you have the Trickery domain then you have Coyote, Loki, Olidamarra and Anansi all squabbling over who gets to be the Trickster god. You have Lolth and Anansi both fighting over the Spider domain. Wee Jas, Boccob, Mystra and Thoth fighting over magic...

Whichever god is currently in charge of the domain would get more power and their Clerics would be more powerful. That way you can actually have a campaign culminating in killing an evil god, and there be an understudy so that evil is weakened and fewer people die yet there is still a god - the players can actually affect the world but it is still recognisable.

[Zinegata]

I'd agree that "Gods are titles or thrones of power" sounds like an awesome idea, where Hades and Set are squabbling over the Throne of Death.

It'd also give high level players a specific thing to do - which is to get involved with the God Wars.

[Maj]

Hmmm... so gods are more like titles or thrones of power or whatever. For example if you have the Trickery domain then you have Coyote, Loki, Olidamarra and Anansi all squabbling over who gets to be the Trickster god. You have Lolth and Anansi both fighting over the Spider domain. Wee Jas, Boccob, Mystra and Thoth fighting over magic...

Whichever god is currently in charge of the domain would get more power and their Clerics would be more powerful. That way you can actually have a campaign culminating in killing an evil god, and there be an understudy so that evil is weakened and fewer people die yet there is still a god - the players can actually affect the world but it is still recognisable.

Yeah, something like that. But I think it's important that you don't necessarily worship the god itself, but the domain the god rules over. You wouldn't be a worshiper of Boccob, but a follower of "magic" (or something), with Boccob in more of a position like the Pope, I guess. That way you can have followers of various powerful representatives of an idea (Follow the shoe! No, follow the gourd!) but still have the basic power source be the same.

I don't know that I'd try to work in exceedingly complex levels of power difference in with the portfolios of the various deities [and deities to-be] - I think that may be too much of a pain in the ass. Personally, though D&D doesn't have a mechanic for it, I'd prefer to see something like that reflected in some sort of reputation mechanic (which I think will encourage allegiance and roleplaying more than alignment did).

[Username17]

If you want gods to come and go, you pretty much have to dump the idea of clerics getting their super powers from any god.

-Username17

[Jilocasin]

I've always liked the idea that it's possible for the PCs to gank the gods. You'd want your default pantheon with possible metaplot evolution, but having a built in mechanism where super bad asses regularly have the opportunity to become gods and ascend to the divine realms would be awesome. Something sort of like the golden bridge and the silver bridge of Chinese mythology.

I'm completely in favor of dumping the idea that clerics get their powers from an individual god. They should get their powers from the position that a particular god holds.

[Zinegata]

If you want gods to come and go, you pretty much have to dump the idea of clerics getting their super powers from any god.

-Username17

Not really. It doesn't have to be Perpetual Time of Troubles.

The Gods could be in a perpetual state of Cold War. Or time passes for them in a different way so that it takes centuries for Gods to be replaced.

(And that actually gives me another idea for the Thought Exercise).

[Lago PARANOIA]

Like Zinegata and Maj said, I feel that clerics (or whatever) in the future shouldn't be getting their power from any god, or at least not the vast majority of them.

People schtupping the divine power source should be getting their powers from the Land (Red, Black, etc.) and the Domain (Magic, War, Earth, etc.). The gods are like the Pope or King or whatever; they can perform great personal miracles in service to their land/domain and can even grant certain people direct access to the power source, but a divine person doesn't NEED to go through the god directly to do so.

Or to put it another way, a God can put you on the wagon but they can't take you off. Once Hades decides to make Steve the Crap-Covered Peasant his personal Gehenna Avatar, he can't take it back; if Steve displeases Hades in the future or Dracula usurps Hades position or if Hades gets stabbed in the face, Steve is still as badass as before. Steve of course has the option of petitioning Ganesh or Susanoo to change his source and making him an avatar of Wisdom or Storms or whatever, but he doesn't have to.

[Judging__Eagle]

Hmmm... so gods are more like titles or thrones of power or whatever. For example if you have the Trickery domain then you have Coyote, Loki, Olidamarra and Anansi all squabbling over who gets to be the Trickster god. You have Lolth and Anansi both fighting over the Spider domain. Wee Jas, Boccob, Mystra and Thoth fighting over magic...

Whichever god is currently in charge of the domain would get more power and their Clerics would be more powerful. That way you can actually have a campaign culminating in killing an evil god, and there be an understudy so that evil is weakened and fewer people die yet there is still a god - the players can actually affect the world but it is still recognisable.

Yeah, something like that. But I think it's important that you don't necessarily worship the god itself, but the domain the god rules over. You wouldn't be a worshiper of Boccob, but a follower of "magic" (or something), with Boccob in more of a position like the Pope, I guess. That way you can have followers of various powerful representatives of an idea (Follow the shoe! No, follow the gourd!) but still have the basic power source be the same.

I don't know that I'd try to work in exceedingly complex levels of power difference in with the portfolios of the various deities [and deities to-be] - I think that may be too much of a pain in the ass. Personally, though D&D doesn't have a mechanic for it, I'd prefer to see something like that reflected in some sort of reputation mechanic (which I think will encourage allegiance and roleplaying more than alignment did).

I rather like the idea of characters worshiping dieties to get special powers; even if they aren't clerics.

Having a Combat: Physique focused character worship Thor, Kord, Ares, Tyr, Kokou or some other "strong"/"war" Diety is a way that a character could explain having "speshul" powers.

Characters could buy a (Faith) dice pool; choose a patron and then start selecting abilities that they like or make sense. Their Faith/(or w/e) pool adds to related powers (and probably makes them more effective); but at the same time they're probably going to have to do stuff for their patron, and be an example of their patron's will .

Say... 1 patron related action per adventure, per dice in the pool? More related actions generate one-shot bonus 'Faith' dice (like Luck Dice, in that they allow a re-roll, but only applicable to Faith-related powers), but, up to the Faith pool's size (small faith has less conviction, or something).

Up until now, I've not really given any thought to "clerics" or dieties for Heartbreaker, or religious types for FAR.

Having "clericing" be something any character can be is actually pretty interesting.

[violence in the media]

Really, in this discussion of gods to include, how could you leave out Ereshkigal?

Ereshkigal made her voice heard and spake,
Addressed her words to Namtar her vizier,
"Go, Namtar, you must speak to Anu, Ellil, and Ea!
Set your face towards the gate of Anu, Ellil, and Ea,
To say, 'Ever since I was a child and a daughter,
I have not known the playing of other girls,
I have not known the romping of children.
That god whome you sent to me and who has impregnated me- let him sleep with me again!
Send that god to us, and let him spend the night with me as my lover!
I am unclean, and I am not pure enough to perform the judging of the great gods,
The great gods who dwell within Erkalla.
If you do not send that god to me
According to the rites of Erkalla and the great Earth
I shall raise up the dead, and they will eat the living.
I shall make the dead outnumber the living!'"

[baduin]

Hmmm... so gods are more like titles or thrones of power or whatever. For example if you have the Trickery domain then you have Coyote, Loki, Olidamarra and Anansi all squabbling over who gets to be the Trickster god. You have Lolth and Anansi both fighting over the Spider domain. Wee Jas, Boccob, Mystra and Thoth fighting over magic...

Whichever god is currently in charge of the domain would get more power and their Clerics would be more powerful. That way you can actually have a campaign culminating in killing an evil god, and there be an understudy so that evil is weakened and fewer people die yet there is still a god - the players can actually affect the world but it is still recognisable.

Yeah, something like that. But I think it's important that you don't necessarily worship the god itself, but the domain the god rules over. You wouldn't be a worshiper of Boccob, but a follower of "magic" (or something), with Boccob in more of a position like the Pope, I guess. That way you can have followers of various powerful representatives of an idea (Follow the shoe! No, follow the gourd!) but still have the basic power source be the same.

I don't know that I'd try to work in exceedingly complex levels of power difference in with the portfolios of the various deities [and deities to-be] - I think that may be too much of a pain in the ass. Personally, though D&D doesn't have a mechanic for it, I'd prefer to see something like that reflected in some sort of reputation mechanic (which I think will encourage allegiance and roleplaying more than alignment did).

This is actually more like reality. If you look at polytheistic religion beyond the handbook Olympian pantheon Greek mythology, you will see an enormous number of higher and lesser gods, or single gods with multiple names and titles. Since pagan gods are more like physical powers than persons (although they can like or dislike somebody- so you could offend Hermes, and have a bad luck in trade etc), the borders between various gods are not fixed. There are very many Zeuses, with many titles. One person can be in a good relationship with one Zeus and in bad with another.

http://www.theoi.com/Cult/ZeusTitles.html

What is important is that functions are much more stable than names of gods. Even in Italy before Rome conquered it neighbouring cities had different names for some gods. In the Roman empire names of Roman gods were used to refer to many local gods. The Celtic Mercury could be very different the Roman Mercury.

[Starmaker]

Really, in this discussion of gods to include, how could you leave out Ereshkigal?

Not famous enough. There are already two "sexy Black ladies" in Frank's chart (Lolth and Loviatar). I agree she's awesome, though. Better yet, she comes with one (1) free Namtar, who I have huge hots for due to him being portrayed in the adaptations I read as a crazyawesome goth from back when goths weren't lame.

[Maj]

People schtupping the divine power source should be getting their powers from the Land (Red, Black, etc.) and the Domain (Magic, War, Earth, etc.). The gods are like the Pope or King or whatever; they can perform great personal miracles in service to their land/domain and can even grant certain people direct access to the power source, but a divine person doesn't NEED to go through the god directly to do so.

I like rebel stories - tales where some small person disagrees with the status quo and helps overthrow the old regime. I think it should be entirely possible for a cleric to worship an ideal, rather than a person/god/whatever.

I rather like the idea of characters worshiping dieties to get special powers; even if they aren't clerics.

It has always annoyed me that the only really faithful followers of a deity/ideology are some variant cleric or paladin. If religion is going to happen in the setting, then it should mean something more than just, "I carry a sunshine around so Pelor can give me presents!" I kinda like the faith pool idea.

[violence in the media]

Really, in this discussion of gods to include, how could you leave out Ereshkigal?

Not famous enough. There are already two "sexy Black ladies" in Frank's chart (Lolth and Loviatar). I agree she's awesome, though. Better yet, she comes with one (1) free Namtar, who I have huge hots for due to him being portrayed in the adaptations I read as a crazyawesome goth from back when goths weren't lame.

True. But do either of them threaten to empty the lands of the dead if they don't get laid?

[JigokuBosatsu]

Can I just say that "Clerics" need to suck it? Forever?

I'm really tired of the "holy warrior with divine power" trope... because we already have something called the Paladin who is that, and can generally represent your mythic Templar/Hospitaller. But why, for the love of all that is kusala, are monastics/priests given not only magic faith powers, but great combat abilities?

My thought on the matter is that "cleric" spellcasters should just be regular-ass spellcasters. Maybe they have their own particular spell lists, but have the divine powers granted by deities(or causes) be either feats or... whatever. I mean, if you're a badass archmage who happens to be the high priest of the magic deity, why should you have a separate class to represent that?

Anyway. I suppose if we are seriously looking at the 5-color option, then that will take care of the issue anyway.

[Username17]

These days, Magic the Gathering characters have character classes, and 5e D&D could do way worse than just use those. So that means that you've got Wizard, Shaman, Druid, Monk, Cleric and Artificer of course, but you also have Archer, Scout, Warrior, Soldier, Knight, Berserker and Rogue. As a basic pick of 13 character classes, you could certainly do worse.

Mirrodin Clerics mostly have powers that let them move damage around.

The important part though is that under no circumstances should the Disciple of the Vault actually lose his powers just because someone killed Geth and set fire to The Vault. Clerics need to be reflavored as a bookish alternative to the Shaman rather than being a personal avatar of a much more powerful being.

-Username17