Discussion: Deity Changes

[Deleted]

Changing deities for characters has been a touchy subject... especially where divine casters are concerned.  I'm open to hearing feedback/input from players on the subject.  My personal input/thoughts to consider:

1) Should level be a factor?
2) How would you like to see conversions handled when falling is not a factor (i.e. closely allied/similar deities, no alignment changes, etc.)?
3) The PHB2 had a process detailed for conversion/retraining to a new deity.  To summarize, the process involved only a few events (rather than the year-long process that has occurred here in the past).  Should our process more closely mirror this?
4) What would you (ideally) see as the process for changing deities?

To be clear, my intent here is to open discussion on the topic which may or may not influence how we approach this as a server.

[Nokteronoth]

I would say it depends on how much they rely on said deity. A fighter or barbarian? Rogue? They could likely change, in reality, their faith in as long as it takes to learn of a new deity that fits them. (Though the deities might not look too kindly on it.) High or low level, if a character doesn't get much from the gods, I don't think changing deities would make a -huge- difference except on their RP.

In that same vein, I rather like the idea that a cleric or paladin or divine whatever changing deity should have a lot of trouble doing so. They need to renounce their old deity. And prove to the new one that they will stay with them. (Maybe a limit on how many times a cleric can change  deity. After one or two, who would ever accept their service again?) The closer they are to their deity, the harder the change. If you have an epic cleric wanting to change their faith, it should be one hell of a task to change gods. Something that would have to encapsulate everything they did for their original deity and then some.

Trying to keep my thoughts brief, though I might come back to this.

tl:DR - I think it should be based on class and level. Divine classes should have a harder, and limited ability to change their deity. Possible quest material or the like to change. Exponentially harder with level gain. Non-divine classes, much easier time, but still perhaps a bit more trouble depending on how they play their dependence on their god.

~BR

[Nymera]

For nondivine classes, it should be fairly trivial as long as the new diety isn't directly opposed to the old one.

We sometimes forget, due to the game mechanics of dieties, that Faerun is highly polytheistic as a culture.  You have your patron God sure, but you still want to show respect to others too.  You want to pray to Shaundakul before a long trip.  You pray to Kelemvor when a loved one passes, to guard over their soul.  And heck, even good characters are advised to leave a little something at a shrine to Umberlee before sailing in rough weather....not because they like her, but to try and appease the crazy bitch so she leaves you be! 

Given that day-to-day honoring of many of the Gods, shifting from one patron to another isn't so unusual for the common man, due to self-reflection, or major life events.  Only those borrowing magic from the divines have to be so tied to a single God.

[Edge]

Level is definitely a factor. When you're first starting out and coming up with a character concept, it's fairly easy for the character identity to shift and change from what you may have expected once you actually start playing them. I'm pretty sure everybody here can identify with that. So even for a divine caster character, a low-level deity shift shouldn't be a big deal IMO - "in-character", at that level it's not a big stretch to say that they've worshiped their new choice of deity all along, so it's not ACTUALLY a patron change, just a bookkeeping adjustment. Doubly so if the character has not been particularly open or vocal about their divine affiliation.

Higher-level characters obviously are more established, and would have had plenty of time to discover this sort of mistake before (because that's what it is - a mistake in defining the nature and identity of the character at creation) and correct it, and chosen not to for whatever reason. It also increases the likelihood that the character's affiliation is more publicly recognized, unless they've taken great pains to hide it, which is of itself a method of RPing one's connection.

I'd personally consider 10-12 - the point where RP XP becomes enough that you can't just breeze through levels and get by the XP caps with in-game quests - the cutting-off point for allowing free-and-easy character concept retcons like this.

[suddenperihelion]

Just to retype the quote Bella's referring to, for folks that don't have their PHB2 handy.

A cleric who changes his patron deity must complete a quest to prove his devotion to his new patron. The nature of the quest depends on the deity, and it always clearly reflects the deity's alignment as well as his or her goals and beliefs. To start this process, a cleric must voluntarily accept a geas/quest spell cast by a higher-level cleric of his new deity. During this quest, the cleric has no access to spells or cleric class features - except his weapon and armor proficiencies, which he does not forfeit.

Upon completing the quest, the cleric receives the benefit of an atonement spell from a cleric of the new deity. The character then becomes a cleric of the new deity and is inducted into the clergy during an appropriate ceremony of the DM's choosing. After selecting two of the new deity's domains in lieu of his old ones, the character has all the powers and abilities of his previous cleric level, plus the granted powers of his new domains.

This method is the only one by which a cleric can change his deity.

- PHB2, p193

Left unanswered is the question of whether "the benefit of an atonement spell" also includes the 500xp penalty for "deliberate transgressions" contained in the spell description for the Atonement spell (PHB). A very literal reading would suggest the answer is no; after all, an xp penalty isn't a "benefit" at all. Personally though, I can see how it makes conceptual sense for the 500 xp penalty to be payed in cases where the two deities are enemies and/or of differing alignments.

It should also be noted that this quote from the PHB2 is not FR-specific. Thus, the quote only refers to clerics, because in most settings only clerics (and not classes like druids) are required to have a specific patron. Thus, in most settings druids etc. could change deities as easily as any other class. A reasonable adaptation of this rule to Forgotten Realms would stipulate that this is /also/ the only way that the classes FR requires to have a patron deity (like druids) can change patron deities. Note that the druid or other divine caster would have to find a CLERIC of the new faith - another druid would not suffice because geas/quest is not on the druid spell list. And... it turns out this is pretty similar to what FRCS says.

It is possible for a cleric, druid, paladin, or spellcasting ranger (or any other divine spellcaster) to abandon his chosen deity and take up the faith of another deity. In doing so, the divine spellcaster loses all class features of the abandoned deity. To progress as a divine spellcaster of another faith, the character must go on a quest for his new church (often the recovery of a lost item of some importance to the deity), then receive an atonement spell from a representative of his new faith. Once these two conditions are met, the character becomes a divine spellcaster of the new deity, and if a cleric, he chooses two domains from the new deity's repertoire. The character then resumes the class features lost from leaving the old faith(so long as they are still applicable — turning or rebuking undead ability might change, for instance)

-FRCS

It's also obvious that the difficulty and duration of the quest should scale with the level of the divine spellcaster. The difficulty is compounded for clerics and druids especially, who will have to complete the quest while handicapped from the loss of many of their class features. To make matters worse, the divine spellcaster may have trouble obtaining allies for the quest because many of the divine spellcasters's former allies may shun him or her if the alignment/ethos difference is significant - and worshipers of the new deity may be leery to assist someone who has yet to prove themselves. There's a lot of material for human drama and story wrapped up in this, regardless of whether the cleric is a PC or an NPC.

There doesn't appear to be any mechanical penalty associated with changing patron deities for someone who isn't a divine spellcaster, but it does stand to reason that some of the roleplay issues (being considered a turncoat by the old faith and unproven by the new faith) may come into play, especially for highly prominent individuals such as nobility or famous adventurers.

Also I did a bit of googling around, and someone on RPG stack exchange pointed to an interesting additional example. Exemplars of Evil, pages 80-84, depicts an example of an elven fallen cleric adopting a new deity essentially by divine fiat of the new deity (Lolth). Personally though, I don't like the idea of divine fiat being decisive for a PC (but that's an entirely personal bias).

So RAW is fairly straightforward on the issue; the question is whether C-D ought to have a different houserule.

[suddenperihelion]

Mar 30, 2015 6:26:06 GMT -5 Edge said:

Level is definitely a factor. When you're first starting out and coming up with a character concept, it's fairly easy for the character identity to shift and change from what you may have expected once you actually start playing them. I'm pretty sure everybody here can identify with that. So even for a divine caster character, a low-level deity shift shouldn't be a big deal IMO - "in-character", at that level it's not a big stretch to say that they've worshiped their new choice of deity all along, so it's not ACTUALLY a patron change, just a bookkeeping adjustment. Doubly so if the character has not been particularly open or vocal about their divine affiliation.

Higher-level characters obviously are more established, and would have had plenty of time to discover this sort of mistake before (because that's what it is - a mistake in defining the nature and identity of the character at creation) and correct it, and chosen not to for whatever reason. It also increases the likelihood that the character's affiliation is more publicly recognized, unless they've taken great pains to hide it, which is of itself a method of RPing one's connection.

I'd personally consider 10-12 - the point where RP XP becomes enough that you can't just breeze through levels and get by the XP caps with in-game quests - the cutting-off point for allowing free-and-easy character concept retcons like this.

There are plenty of canonical examples of characters (including divine spellcasters) changing their nature as a result of the story. Character development is a good thing, and it's definitely not always a "mistake"!

That said, you do bring up a second, and in my view distinct, issue. Namely, a player makes a mistake on character generation and wants to correct it later on to better fit their concept. This second issue doesn't apply just to deities: it can be ability scores, feats, or any number of other things that wind up not quite fitting the character concept. A quick glance through the LETO forums shows plenty of precedent of this type of mistake happening. I'd like to think that C-D is the kind of community where people aren't raked over the coals for an honest mistake (is there anyone here who can say they've never made an honest mistake?) I guess the other question that comes to my mind, if you're talking about a high level player, is "why doesn't the DM team just say something sooner?" If a player is making an honest mistake (as opposed to a deliberate exploit), I do think that the DM team as a whole has some responsibility to detect it and let them know.

That's sort of incidental, though.

In more extreme cases, the DM team might try to work it into the story, and make it into interesting plot material. There are plenty of canonical examples throughout FR's history of one deity (or powerful nondeity entity) trying to 'impersonate' a deity, granting divine abilities in said deity's name, for all kinds of different reasons. Maybe that explains why the character had divine powers before, despite not fitting their old deity's tenants? That's just one example that took me about 30 seconds to come up with. I'm sure you guys can come up with something even better. A huge part of being a good improvisational actor, roleplayer, or especially dungeon master, is being creative and flexible enough to take whatever you have to work with, roll with it, and make it into something that is interesting and fun.

[ladybug]

I'm in favor of the "up to X level" idea. Concepts can change vastly as soon as they actually start being played, and a PC shouldn't be penalized for the player not getting the idea perfectly right the first time, especially when you can request a rebuild for just about any other reason with no trouble. Now, a change due to story and character development...that's a different story.

[Edge]

Mar 30, 2015 8:27:59 GMT -5 suddenperihelion said:

There are plenty of canonical examples of characters (including divine spellcasters) changing their nature as a result of the story. Character development is a good thing, and it's definitely not always a "mistake"!

While true, that's also completely not what I was talking about. I thought I went well out of my way to make that clear.

[The Red Mage]

I don't think level matters as much, really. Not -that- much. It should impact the severity of the roleplay and create a harder dilemma for the divine caster who has more favor with their patron. But the formula for conversion should be similiar regardless of level(edit: I mean looking at it from a 40 year old level 3 cleric changing deity and a 19 year old level 20). It should be a philosophically life changing event. It may even change alignment over time as it seems that the characters consciousness is what's changing--their outlook on everything.

I think the mechanics are the easiest part. Reflecting the moral dilemma in-game properly both player side and topside would be the difficult part. But I've always been more of an interpersonal story teller. My process would be an investigation into whether or not the character is struggling morally, consciously, behaviorally, or reflecting a fundamental change within themselves and others around them foremost. If they aren't, then I would start to investigate out of character motivations and see if they are reasonable enough.

IE: A player joins the server and makes a character just to test the waters. They are a cleric of selune. They begin getting along with a group of Sunites and after a few months, they find themselves only roleplaying with said group. Said group begins to get quests and the player doesn't feel involved enough and wants to change their patron to Sune, but their character doesn't change in terms of personality, outlook on the world around them, consciously or anything--they just want to be more included. I would suggest to the player to delve deeper into the situation and reflect it through their roleplay first, as it is an opportunity for their group to experience their character and character's story in a way otherwise avoided. If they didn't want to, I would consider the player's livelihood itself and if this decision was important for keeping the player in the server.

The mechanical issue is an easy enough fix all around. Players can gate themselves fine through roleplay. As far as exploiting letoes and rebuilds, well, policing that is a nightmare. There have been several people using rebuilds to get a -bit- more DMXP per relevel to push them further to cap for a while and for other build-exclusive reasons. But that debate goes into how one wants to play the server, and that conversation never ends well.

[ladybug]

But level *does* matter. Level tells how much play a character has had and therefore how much roleplay evidence there is for a change. I don't think you're understanding that. A lowbie is more malleable than a near-epic with an established history, and that does need to be taken into account.

[The Red Mage]

I agree with that. I don't know if there should be a completely different way of evaluating the character for approval, though. In short, I would answer OP question 1 with: Yes. But I would add as long as the process is similar for all divine casters in the situation. If anything higher level casters could be evaluated easier than mid-range leveled ones since they are more established.

[ladybug]

Because here's the angle I'm approaching it from.

I'm an utter noob to FR. I've only played Pathfinder in PnP. I know very little about the server's lore and am working to learn. So let's say I have a theurge concept, and I misread what Azuth's doctrine was like, only to realize Oghma suited how I played the character. Nothing is changing except the deity, which should have been their patron all along. I just made a PEBKAC error, which happens.

Would it be fair to a player in that situation to have to roleplay out a request for a rebuild? Their reasons are entirely roleplay-based. I've been on enough of the internet to know people might take that as a punishment - not because they're anti-RP but because the entire catalyst for the rebuild is to stay true to the roleplay, however little, they have established. If they're a low-enough level that they can be seen as still getting a feel for where the character is going, especially, I'd okay it.

And again, this is not the same situation as "My character has undergone a long-standing change of heart and needs to convert." That should probably have quests and the like and a more formal process than just helping out an early-levels mistake.

[The Red Mage]

I think it's fair, and it would rob you at a chance for interesting roleplay, not only for yourself, but for the other players and characters who want to get to know your character. It's a chance for some characters to help you in game with your OOC knowledge if any of them are well learned. I just disagree with a level cap to rebuilding. I can see the logic with your situation, I just disagree with it and think it's better handled on a RP server through RP.

[ladybug]

But they've DONE the RP. It feels like getting double-charged, and I could very easily see people getting very upset.

[The Red Mage]

If they get upset, I would ask the player and consider the OOC implications I mentioned. If it feels like you might lose a player over this, then I think that should be considered over IC actions. But I would suggest RPing it out first.