Add Selune to acceptable Ranger deities

[allatum]

From the forum's own post on Silverstars:

Silverstar

Silverstars are dedicated advocates of freedom and tolerance, wanderers on the path of truth, and absolute foes of Shar. They seek to build harmony among lycanthropes and nonshapechangers, and they protect the weak and oppressed everywhere. They cannot abide slavery, and they hate most undead. They rarely settle in one place for long, instead moving along when seized by wanderlust or enticed by a new cause or mission. Sometimes they receive visions and are seen as somewhat "touched" with prophecy by their closeness to the Moonmaiden. They deal with lunar energies and phenomena and are, to a limited degree, able to wield the power of the moon, bringing its fierce, pure white light to Toril to advance the goddess's wishes.
Clerics most often become silverstars; rangers are a less common choice. Selûne demands an individualistic outlook on life that is incompatible with the lawful nature of paladins and monks, and her passionately good and chaotic nature leaves little room for the balance a druid requires.
Silverstars are often found in large coastal cities dependent on the sea for trade and sustenance. Others prefer the outlying reaches of civilized realms, where lycanthropes are most common. Whereever they are found, silverstars actively oppose the activities and misdeeds of Shar's followers, whether singly or in groups.

Prestige Class List

[Edge]

First off, let's try being less demanding with our requests.

Secondly, the list is currently in flux and is not yet finalized. It is likely to be expanded in the near future as we investigate other sources beyond FRCS for a proper list, as the FRCS list has repeatedly proven to be incomplete.

[allatum]

I'm a laconic person at the best of times, you'll have to excuse the curtness.

But yeah, It's a demand if you want to make it out to be that way. A demand so I don't have to reapply with a 500+ word mini-essay on why a certain character with certain backgrounds is a ranger. Secondly, it's a matter of consistency for past approvals. Thirdly, It's been on both the old and new forums so it should be a matter of CD canon.

[Goat]

So I wanted to chime in on this as well, as Theodyr is a Cleric/Silverstar/Ranger of Selune.  I've looked through several sourcebooks and it seems that there is evidence for rangers worshipping Selune (and other deities that are outside of the "Nature" deity block).

So to start out with the oldest source first:

Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting (2001), P.#26

Concerning rangers:



"Unlike clerics, druids, and paladins, Faerunian rangers do not have to choose a patron deity until they reach 4th level and acquire divine spellcasting ability (without a patron deity a ranger cannot cast spells).  Many rangers choose a patron deity before then, but others start by devotion to the ranger's way of life instead of to one of the gods.  Rangers and druids have similar preferences for deities, although some rangers with odd interests (such as hunting undead) choose different patrons."

This would seem to suggest that while nature deities are the common choice, there are rangers who go against the grain and are able to cast divine spells.  This sets precedence for coming source material.

Faiths and Pantheons(2002), p.#201

Silverstar:



"Clerics most often become silverstars; rangers are a less common choice."  Also note that to become a Silverstar, your divine patron must be Selune.

The next reference to rangers being associated with Selune comes from everyone's favorite Faiths and Pantheons.  Rangers can become Silverstars, the big requirement of which is that your patron deity must be Selune.

Players Guide to Faerun (2004), p.#81



Initiate of Selune (Feat)

Prerequisites: Cleric, druid, hathran, or ranger level 3rd, patron deity Selune.

The next reference comes from Players Guide to Faerun concerning a new feat called Initiate of Selune, reinforcing the idea that rangers can receive spells from her (and apparently druids, but I'm not about to open that can of worms).

Champions of Valor (2005), p.#104

Swords of the Lady:

"Members of this order of Selunite clerics, druids, rangers and mystic wanders are thought mad by many people because of their sometimes eccentric behavior."

Concerning Selune and rangers once more, the Swords of the Lady are an order of worshippers of Selune.


There are also three NPCs listed in this book, as follows, who are listed as "Rangers of Selune"

Champions of Valor (2005), p.#82

Fellowship of the Purple Staff; one of the leading NPCs, Jehastra Wintergaze is listed as a ranger of Selune.



Champions of Valor (2005), p.#144

NPC Brenvol Whitebrow is listed as a Ranger of Selune.



Champions of Valor (2005), p.#150

NPC Rindon Wasatho is also listed as a Ranger of Selune.

Finally, just for fun, two ranger substitution levels that mention other deities that are not considered Nature deities.

Champions of Valor (2005), p.#49

Concerning Shadow Sword Rangers; one of the requirements being that they must have a patron deity of Shaundakul.



Champions of Valor (2005), p.#50

Concerning Shooting Star Rangers; one of the requirements being that they must have a patron deity of Mystra.

Overall, I feel that this sets a precedent that rangers should be allowed to worship non-Nature deities and feel that there has been justifiable evidence over the years that Selune is not an unusual choice for a wanderer of the wilds.  I can understand having an application for others, but over the course of the server's history, there have been countless rangers who fall outside of the 'norm' and do not fit the nature stereotype.

[Not Batman]

Gelgar Talonguard - Helm - FRCS 3rd Ed page 10
Chvar Eldenbow - Oghma - Cloak and Dagger page 30
Myrmeen Lhal - Tymora - FRCS 3rd Ed page 112/113
Martine - Tymora - 'Soldiers of Ice' A novel written by David Cook, one of the leading 3.5 sourcebook writers.
Minsc - Never stated to have a deity and no statistical information has a deity listed in-game (Baldur's Gate 2/Neverwinter. BG2 is canon, referenced several times in books. Can get page numbers if need be. It is also a common theory that Minsc worshipped Boo.)
Brenvol Whitebrow - Selune - Champions of Valor page 80
Rindon Wasatho - Selune  - Champions of Valor page 150
Jehastra Wintergaze - Selune - Champions of Valor page 82

Page 26 of the FRCS states an example of Bane following Rangers, as well as detailed rangers loyal to organizations.

[lurkerabove]

Shaundakul

Faiths & Pantheons 3rd Ed. Windwalker Prestige Class (and our own PrC writeup on our the CD website):

Most Windwalkers are clerics or rangers. Some bards and sorcerors become windwalkers, but other classes rarely follow this path.

[Garage Trashcan]

Yeah, I don't know where the whole, "Rangers must worship nature deities," came from, considering on the old forum it was always explicitly stated that they only needed to have any patron deity to benefit from divine spellcasting. The post should be changed to just Druids, as that's the only one that makes canonical sense and actually matches what CD has always had.

[Arya]

I think I can safely speak for the admins that they are still working on the Ranger piece and the list is still a work-in-progress (as Edge noted). 

I understand the frustrations, truly, from both a player wanting to make sure they can play their character and also as the person on the other side trying to make some content standardized in light of all the contradictions. Being someone who likes making weird concepts that sometimes go-against-type, I get a -lot- of flack for my characters I play both in face (and other ways), and the pressure is real. It makes me feel like a bad storyteller/roleplayer/gamer/whatever. Which involves all sort of other outcomes of which I dare not elaborate in this thread at risk of major derailment, heh. >.> 

I digress, though.

Onto the topic at hand: I think at this rate the admins really just need a little more time to work something out and make amendments as need. Honestly, I also do not think they would really demand the rangers to switch if the character had been established and approved (such as Silverstars who need approval, or did). I notice more often than not, they are okay with grandfathering stuff within reason. More specifically, there was a clause on stuff that special cases applied for and approved was still okay. If I may be bold to say, that includes required-approval applications (ECL, PrC, etc) where there was that proposed class combination. :-) Hopefully, this will put the Selunites at ease about their concepts, which were/are very well deserved and played out from my observations (over all).  

I feel part of the balance also is that they are trying to provide some reference lists people can just look at and not need to dig through all the materials out there (just as I am slowly doing so for elf stuff on elf forums). It is tedious, and materials really like to contradict. I had ...ah...discussion with both people with access to the same materials and otherwise once in a blue moon (nothing too vicious, mind). That is another angle to look at, as well. 


Sincerely,
Arya

[Edge]

Mar 26, 2017 7:49:25 GMT -5 Garage Trashcan said:

Yeah, I don't know where the whole, "Rangers must worship nature deities," came from, considering on the old forum it was always explicitly stated that they only needed to have any patron deity to benefit from divine spellcasting. The post should be changed to just Druids, as that's the only one that makes canonical sense and actually matches what CD has always had.

Mostly because this isn't true. Yes some were told this (myself included), while others were told rangers always needed to serve a nature deity, and still others that deity didn't matter unless you got to the levels you could use ranger spells, but after that point you needed a naturey patron or you couldn't use those spells.

It doesn't help that WOTC has been extremely inconsistent about this across different books, as this very thread has provided so many examples of. Even more so when adding in non-FR expansions and setting-neutral books that while not necessarily designed for use with the setting contain information and mechanics we do make use of here.

As Arya said, what we ask right now is a bit of patience. We aren't yet going to start telling people to change deity or rebuild out of class. We're trying to bring a unified handle to a question that's been answered several different ways over the server's existence, and as such it's going to take some time.

[Not Batman]

Mar 26, 2017 11:41:27 GMT -5 Edge said:

It doesn't help that WOTC has been extremely inconsistent about this across different books, as this very thread has provided so many examples of. Even more so when adding in non-FR expansions and setting-neutral books that while not necessarily designed for use with the setting contain information and mechanics we do make use of here.

The bulk of the examples that have been offered are from FR sources. WOTC is actually very consistent on this matter, of the two dozen or so examples that we have presented so far, there is only one example that speaks to the contrary. Different settings have different rules and the PHB (one of the examples offered) is one that is written largely with Greyhawk in mind. It is worth mentioning that the source for the conflicting information comes from a rather "eh" source. Faiths and Pantheons was written by Erik Mona and Eric Boyd were rather new to the FR setting when they wrote that book, and it was really their first (And close to last) FR book. Their career was largely involved with Greyhawk, setting-neutral books (Fiendish Codex 1 for example) and Pathfinder.

As much as I would love for any excuse to punch on WotC, this simply looks to be the fault of the two writers who have very little experience with the setting, judging from their resume. Add to the debate, this book has always been on that is highly controversial and the information represented within was something shunned by a lot of developers and players alike. It drove a HARD wedge into third party developers and even places like Dicefreaks simply because it did something that was considered heretical at one point in time. It stated gods. People didn't want to see gods stated. It took away that aura of mystery and omnipotence and turned them into a "Well, I could easily kill this god with my level 40 Soul Knife/Pyrokineticist ogre who has two pairs of Glabrezu arms grafted to his pecs". In addition to this, the statistics presented within this book were largely considered by third party developers and most major D&D forum sites to be the stats of -avatars- and for the REAL gods to remain unstated so they did not simply become a benchmark for gank-tanks to go after.

Ultimately, there is so far only one source listed that contradicts the dozens of sources that say otherwise, just throw out the lego that doesn't fit.

[Edge]

[Deleted]

Most of the listed examples come prior to Faiths and Pantheons.

We've ruled, in the past, that the latter books supercede the prior... much as addendums.  As such, Champions of Valor would be considered valid, but FRCS not so.  (It's one of the reasons that we've allowed paladins of Selune, from Champions of Valor...  just as we're looking into the ranger situation.)

Our exceptions to this have been very limited, such as with the Wheel of the Planes.

But again, it's something that we're still looking into.

[Goat]

It all seems that everything builds upon what was listed in the original FRCS (published in 2001) in that rangers usually have nature deities, but not always.  This further seems to be held consistent in Faiths and Pantheons (published in 2002) mentions that rangers can have various patrons.  In 2004 we have Player's Guide to Faerun that lists being a ranger with a patron Selune a requirement for a feat.  Then finally in 2005, Champions of Valor mentions many different patrons for rangers.  

Now I know other aspects of the setting have been conflicted, but I'm not seeing how it is in this case, unless I'm missing something and being completely derp.  If so, can someone please point it out to me?  I'm asking in all seriousness, as it is something I do want to understand. <3

[Mystic Warden]

I think there is one other consideration about the ranger class which we should remember, namely that it is the go-to class for players who would like to play a warrior with some finesse. Something between the pure combat focused fighter and the skill-based rogue, without the sneak attack and its attached morality baggage for the later. It is not an uncommon situation, and the 'favored enemy' ability is also meshing well into many possible PC backgrounds. Even if the spellcasting abilities would be removed, this class offers a strong foundation to anchor many PC background concepts and the RP related to it.

Considering that we only have a limited number of base classes and PrCs it could be a better path if the flexibilites of the base classes are not reduced but improved. Of course we don't want non-lawful monks, non LG paladins, etc. running around, because for those classes the restrictions are integral concept to the whole. But specifically the ranger class provides a lot of potential freedom we could use and enjoy with only minimal or zero modifications to the class which we should not loose with something like the discussed restriction IMHO.

[Not Batman]

I forgot to mention. Eric Boyd, the main writer of Faiths and Pantheons? He wrote the Forgotten Realms 4th Edition Campaign Setting. Which that book was another mess of contradictions (Contradicted itself,  other source material, novels, and the word of Old Greenbeard). So this is not a new thing for him (And that book was an abomination).