Baldur's Gate : The Sword Coast Chronicles : NWN2 Persistent World

Valefort wrote:

cosmic ray wrote:No deity - 1153

*dies a little inside*

Yeah that's the most incomprehensible part of the stats, so many faithless !

Actually in 1st edition faithless was quite a bit more realistic. Deities power was not based on number of their faithful and thus there was no tie-in requiring a deity to do much for their flock. In addition, until the ToT there was no hard evidence of the gods, at least none that the majority of the populace would see. In first edition (the timeline we are in) you did not even have to worship a deity to get cleric or druid powers... Now, if there has been a DM ruling on knowledge of what happens to faithless and false then I'll stand corrected, but if we are going strictly by the lore of D&D in our timeline there would likely be far more "no deity" characters than what would exist once 2nd edition roles around.

sweetlikesplenda wrote:Hey Vale

Just a thought that lead me to a question; did the 100% RcR that was offered effect those numbers? To clarify, since the system deletes out a PC and we create the new one to take over the XP from the old, does that skew the numbers at all, since some people may have multiple entries in the chats for the same PC? Also, as another example, I had to remake my PC due to the Energy Immunity issue. I created another exact same build, just fixing the spell issue. Would that mean that the classes, deity, alignment, etc create a duplicate entry in to the tables you provided?

Only the characters present in everyone's vault yesterday were taken into account.

Young Werther wrote:Those faithless may be place holding unlisted gods, devils, demons, fey powers, spirits, ect, tho.

I hope so!!! This is the Forgotten Realms, after all!

Can we consider this proof that neither good nor evil are vastly outnumbered?

chad878262 wrote:

Valefort wrote:

cosmic ray wrote:No deity - 1153

*dies a little inside*

Yeah that's the most incomprehensible part of the stats, so many faithless !

Actually in 1st edition faithless was quite a bit more realistic. Deities power was not based on number of their faithful and thus there was no tie-in requiring a deity to do much for their flock. In addition, until the ToT there was no hard evidence of the gods, at least none that the majority of the populace would see. In first edition (the timeline we are in) you did not even have to worship a deity to get cleric or druid powers... Now, if there has been a DM ruling on knowledge of what happens to faithless and false then I'll stand corrected, but if we are going strictly by the lore of D&D in our timeline there would likely be far more "no deity" characters than what would exist once 2nd edition roles around.

Can we get a ruling on this? I for one am curious!

Valefort wrote:...and less than 500 000 gold (because otherwise a few extremely rich PCs screw the whole graph )

You should do some graphs for the rich elites... graphs that aren't sullied by the unwashed plebs.

(This is meant as humor!)

(deleted)

Laughingman wrote:Can we consider this proof that neither good nor evil are vastly outnumbered?

Since we all know 99% of neutral aligned PCs are evil-but-neutral-for-mechanics (100% certain stat !) we can safely say that good is vastly outnumbered.

Babuguuscooties wrote:

chad878262 wrote: Actually in 1st edition faithless was quite a bit more realistic. Deities power was not based on number of their faithful and thus there was no tie-in requiring a deity to do much for their flock. In addition, until the ToT there was no hard evidence of the gods, at least none that the majority of the populace would see. In first edition (the timeline we are in) you did not even have to worship a deity to get cleric or druid powers... Now, if there has been a DM ruling on knowledge of what happens to faithless and false then I'll stand corrected, but if we are going strictly by the lore of D&D in our timeline there would likely be far more "no deity" characters than what would exist once 2nd edition roles around.

Can we get a ruling on this? I for one am curious!

Guys. RAW D&D might allow such, but Forgotten Realms Setting strictly states that divine spellcasting comes only from deities, whether nature or not. There's really no need for a ruling for this, all you need is to read Magic of Faerun Being faithless on Faerun is universally being regarded as a madman/woman.

Valefort wrote:

Laughingman wrote:Can we consider this proof that neither good nor evil are vastly outnumbered?

Since we all know 99% of neutral aligned PCs are evil-but-neutral-for-mechanics (100% certain stat !) we can safely say that good is vastly outnumbered.

Ravial wrote:

Babuguuscooties wrote:

chad878262 wrote: Actually in 1st edition faithless was quite a bit more realistic. Deities power was not based on number of their faithful and thus there was no tie-in requiring a deity to do much for their flock. In addition, until the ToT there was no hard evidence of the gods, at least none that the majority of the populace would see. In first edition (the timeline we are in) you did not even have to worship a deity to get cleric or druid powers... Now, if there has been a DM ruling on knowledge of what happens to faithless and false then I'll stand corrected, but if we are going strictly by the lore of D&D in our timeline there would likely be far more "no deity" characters than what would exist once 2nd edition roles around.

Can we get a ruling on this? I for one am curious!

Guys. RAW D&D might allow such, but Forgotten Realms Setting strictly states that divine spellcasting comes only from deities, whether nature or not. There's really no need for a ruling for this, all you need is to read Magic of Faerun Being faithless on Faerun is universally being regarded as a madman/woman.

What edition did Magic of Faerun come out in? Our timeline is Pre-time of troubles. Regardless of what HORRIBLE fate awaits faithless in the afterlife the simple fact is that our PC's WOULD NOT KNOW THIS!!!! Just because we use 3.5 rules does not mean our lore matches up with the 3.5 timeline. (Divine) Magic might come from the deities, but that does not mean a given (divine) caster BELIEVES that their gift comes from a deity. A character might believe in the good of all humanity and seek to ease the suffering of others. Illmater might just grant that individual spells because they are furthering the portfolio associated to the god.

It is not about what RAW allows, is about the timeline we are playing in and using OOC knowledge that we (the players) have in order to make IC decision for our characters. Nothing was published about the wall of the faithless in the first edition and gods didn't start taking direct action that proved their existence until ToT (other than a few edge cases).

Provide a Forgotten Realms specific source that contradicts this. Otherwise adhere to lore.

chad878262 wrote:(Divine) Magic might come from the deities, but that does not mean a given (divine) caster BELIEVES that their gift comes from a deity. A character might believe in the good of all humanity and seek to ease the suffering of others. Illmater might just grant that individual spells because they are furthering the portfolio associated to the god.

This is almost possible. But it's not possible by CLERICS. This is where Favoured Soul may indeed have a place in FR. But the magic must come from a deity and the Favoured Soul must act in accordance with the dogma of that god.

chad878262 wrote:What edition did Magic of Faerun come out in? Our timeline is Pre-time of troubles. Regardless of what HORRIBLE fate awaits faithless in the afterlife the simple fact is that our PC's WOULD NOT KNOW THIS!!!! Just because we use 3.5 rules does not mean our lore matches up with the 3.5 timeline. (Divine) Magic might come from the deities, but that does not mean a given (divine) caster BELIEVES that their gift comes from a deity. A character might believe in the good of all humanity and seek to ease the suffering of others. Illmater might just grant that individual spells because they are furthering the portfolio associated to the god.

chad878262 wrote:Actually in 1st edition faithless was quite a bit more realistic. Deities power was not based on number of their faithful and thus there was no tie-in requiring a deity to do much for their flock. In addition, until the ToT there was no hard evidence of the gods, at least none that the majority of the populace would see. In first edition (the timeline we are in) you did not even have to worship a deity to get cleric or druid powers.

Say that again?
1st edition Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting is, I'm afraid, against you.
I could also flood you with accounts of deities appearing throughout history of Faerun, from First Flowering to our current timeline, but I don't think I really need to if you have read any sourcebook about history of the realms, or even Faiths and Avatars of 2nd edition, which contains quite good information of pre-tot state of faiths as well.

Ravial wrote:Say that again?
1st edition Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting is, I'm afraid, against you.
I could also flood you with accounts of deities appearing throughout history of Faerun, from First Flowering to our current timeline, but I don't think I really need to if you have read any sourcebook about history of the realms, or even Faiths and Avatars of 2nd edition, which contains quite good information of pre-tot state of faiths as well.

Jesus Christ walked among living men as well so I suppose everyone should be Christian... The angel Gabriel visited Muhammad to command changes from God to man so perhaps we should all be Muslim.

Not trying to start an IRL religious debate, but saying there should be no atheists or agnostic persons in FR during our timeline because "there are accounts of deities appearing throughout history of Faerun" is kind of the same thing, isn't it? If Tom the farmer never saw it, for all he knows it is just some Priest quoting scripture that he may or may not even be able to read himself. So quote all the accounts you want, but how does that apply to the individuals who weren't there? In a world without nearly the connectivity we have in our world some story about Tyr appearing down in Calimshan or Auril's presence showing up in Amn isn't going to be necessarily taken as fact by someone in Baldur's Gate that has never been to either of those places and never truly witnessed the appearance of any god.

Deathgrowl wrote:Provide a Forgotten Realms specific source that contradicts this. Otherwise adhere to lore.

Fair enough, Clerics know that their powers are god granted. How does that then apply to every single individual on Faerun knowing beyond a shadow of a doubt that the gods truly exist? Is there anything in lore prior to ToT where there is massive evidence felt/seen/witnessed by the majority of those living which would make a scenario where atheism would be unheard of?

I don't play any characters who don't have a deity, but I can recall when I played (mostly 2nd edition, but some 1st edition, though this is 20+ years ago so certainly may be faulty memory on my part) that the deities for both FR and Greyhawk were provided and expanded upon over time. Nothing was ever stated in the 1st edition that everyone was certain gods existed and even the screen shot shown states "Player Charaters are not limited to professing a belief in any particular Power, or offering worship to any of them...." So clerics must have a deity and get spells, fine I withdraw that statement. However, my point was that as atheism was put to question (as to why we have so many PCs with no deity) the source material would appear to support that point (if not the one about clerics/druids worshipping an 'ideal' that might have been something I recall from some book or article or some other thing that wasn't official, no idea honestly).

So it would appear we have source material from our timeline that would support non-clerics/druids who are atheist/agnostic. yes?

Chad. Nobody ever said that there are no atheists or agnostics on Faerun, otherwise even the game wouldn't allow picking no deity. I only said they are universally considered mad, because vast majority of Faerun is faithful to at least one deity either for divine power, following deity's ideals, or in fear what afterlife might bring, which may or may not be known. A common person seeing a cleric invoke name of their deity, say ilmater, and seeing his friend or son being healed- How can you deny existance of a deity when you see that? No wizard can cast healing spells. Clerics are one of the ways that deities are manifesting their power and existance. Heck, they can even rarely possess clerics for a certain time, if the matter is of utmost importance for their ideals.

As for atheists, I suggest reading about monks of the Old Order, as I think they do not follow any deity at all.