Paladins with no Diety?

[Knightmage Bael]

Aren't Paladins obligated to select a diety normally? Did they just decide Cause + Diety would be too specific of a customization option?

[Trap Queen 85]

Originally posted by Tyger Eyes:

With all that said, I would have to say breaking your oath as a paladin (in some instances) will summon in a flaming knight (avatar or herald of god like being) who tells you they will visit you in that night (never did visit me in camp), but that implication is deity or no deity - some divinity is behind it (your oath).

I play Pathfinder 2E (though loved 1E before it got uber complex) because I loved AD&D 2E & 3E/3.5E. in our games we always played the games with powers being divinely granted, especially when there is a Cavalier (or Knight that is not Holy/Unholy)... question is, if oaths are enough, what reason is there to deny Cavalier (or non-Holy Knight) same powers.

Personally, I have felt there are enough Deities Portfolios where a Deity or Oaths, Honor, Goodness, Chivalry exists for most "Holy Knights" (Paladins) to draw powers from one of numerous gods (and deities of tyranny or Devil Lords would grant the power to Unholy Knights).

Regardless, I think my main point is why include a Flaming Knight (cut scene) which suggests an avatar or herald - if there is no divine power involved - why call it a "Holy" Knight rather than an Oath-Bound Knight? Ah, well, only the Shadow knows, right?

Originally posted by Archmage_Bael:

Aren't Paladins obligated to select a deity normally? Did they just decide Cause + Deity would be too specific of a customization option?

Yep Great points

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Originally posted by THEBEAST6969:

i think having the option would be dope

Hela dope

[Ghost]

Originally posted by 🜍:

That's really interesting. Reminds me a bit of The Neverending Story actually.

Unrelated to topic, but obligatory mention that the horse was actually fine.
It died in 2010 due to old age.

[GrandMajora]

Originally posted by 🜍:

Wow, that adds a whole different dimension to things and really breaks the 4th wall. Food for thought. :idglass:

Sharess, the goddess of hedonism in the Forgotten Realms, is actually Bast, the Egyptian goddess of cats.

For whatever reason, she decided to change her identity after getting isekaied.

[Raï 𓆣]

Originally posted by GrandMajora:

Originally posted by 🜍:

Wow, that adds a whole different dimension to things and really breaks the 4th wall. Food for thought.

Sharess, the goddess of hedonism in the Forgotten Realms, is actually Bast, the Egyptian goddess of cats.

For whatever reason, she decided to change her identity after getting isekaied.

"Struck by wanderlust, Bast traveled across Faerûn leaving many cults in her wake. During these travels, she also subsumed the divinity of Zandilar the Dancer, a goddess of the Yuir elves, gaining that goddess' portfolio of intense passionate love."

I'm actually feeling a bit envious of the folk in Faerûn now ;) To meet an actual Egyptian goddess, just traveling around, that's kinda incredible.

[Tyger Eyes]

Maybe, I can see the reason one might think so, but Bast was never evil and sexual hedonism is not 'evil' per se. It was not Satan or Succubus/Incubus hedonism (which is more lust and faithlessness bound - temptation based). Bast's portfolio was much broader and she was regarded as a chaotic but good (or neutral) goddess depending on how you wished to see her and the nature of her porfolio. Pretty sure Sharess is evil, no?

I would liken her to Hecate more than Bast.

PS: I left AD&D when they lost their minds in 4E for Pathfinder 1E (and how 2E)... so I am not saying you are wrong or the current AD&D lore does is not what you said... D&D has screwed up a lot to things in my mind... Bast to Sharess might just be another one. Cheers :)

Originally posted by GrandMajora:

Originally posted by 🜍:

Wow, that adds a whole different dimension to things and really breaks the 4th wall. Food for thought. :idglass:

Sharess, the goddess of hedonism in the Forgotten Realms, is actually Bast, the Egyptian goddess of cats.

For whatever reason, she decided to change her identity after getting isekaied.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Bast came to get basted

[GrandMajora]

Originally posted by Tyger Eyes:

Maybe, I can see the reason one might think so, but Bast was never evil and sexual hedonism is not 'evil' per se. It was not Satan hedonism. Bast's portfolio was much broader and she was regarded as a chaotic but good (or neutral) goddess depending on how you wished to see her and the nature of her porfolio. Pretty sure Sharess is evil, no?

You're probably thinking of Shar, the goddess of darkness, secrets and loss.

According to the wiki, Sharess is Chaotic Good, while Shar is Neutral Evil

[GrandMajora]

Originally posted by 🜍:

I'm actually feeling a bit envious of the folk in Faerûn now ;) To meet an actual Egyptian goddess, just traveling around, that's kinda incredible.

Again, you could also just casually run into Zeus, or Thor during your travels. Entire pantheons got sucked into D&D.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Originally posted by GrandMajora:

Originally posted by 🜍:

I'm actually feeling a bit envious of the folk in Faerûn now ;) To meet an actual Egyptian goddess, just traveling around, that's kinda incredible.

Entire pantheons got sucked

You could say that again

[Spella]

deities such as Azuth, Bahamut, Chauntea or her aspect Yondalla, Helm, Ilmater, Kelemvor, Mystra, Jergal, Lathander, Moradin, Re-Horakhty, Sune, Torm, or Tyr. Are very much still a thing in DnD forgotten realms.. You just have to pick one.. The game itself isn't fully done yet..we don't know for sure if they well add them in. Kind of strange to build a game off the forgotten realms and not go full on with it lol.

[KOHb]

Originally posted by Pan Darius Kairos:

'Divine' doesn't necessarily imply devotion to a single god though.

The power could come from Ao granting power to all Paladins, or it could come from the outer plane most closely corresponding to the Paladin's moral and ethical ideals (thus you could have Paladins of the Nine Hells, Paladins of Celestia, Paladins of Arcadia, Paladins of the Feywild, Paladins of the Shadowfell, Paladins of Limbo, and so forth).

Power could also come from a pantheon rather than a single god as well. Perhaps the power of an Oath of the Ancients Paladin comes from all the Seldarine gods, while an Oath of Devotion Paladin gains their power from 'good' aligned gods in general.

The system is flexible enough to allow for this kind of creative interpretation.

The Paladin might even be powered by their own soul.

God system in this franchise differs from IRL. Gods there 'really exist', it's a fact. No doubts. Which, btw makes Atheism almost impossible. While IRL all believes and Faith in God are just a theory. No one knows for sure.

Also, there are not much creatures in DnD that are not part of any deity, godless.
And as was said earlier even 'flyshit' could be a god, or ascended soul as you mentioned. Why not?
Or a pantheon as a source of divine power. Why not? The point is — there must be a divine source for divine power. Power cannot be without source.

Same as fighter or rogue could be related to deity too. But in their case it doesn't matter at all, because it's only character-related. While for paladin it could be a lot more important.

[cl656]

Originally posted by GrandMajora:

Originally posted by Dis Lexic:

Personally, I quite like the fact that they draw their power from their oath rather than a deity. It opens up more options than just 'FOR THE <Insert deity of choice here>' style of holy knight. You could very easily run a hella edgy Oath of Vengeance Paladin who is full on, balls to the wall, ♥♥♥♥ everything but my mission without causing problems.

Well I don't like it. Without a deity, you're basically saying that anyone can swear a vow with such conviction that it grants them divine powers, only for them to break that vow and then spontaneously obtain unholy powers as a replacement.

It's just very weird, when you consider the implications of that.

i thought the same thing. it sound kind of stupid lorewise.

[Frostblud]

Paladins have always been Holy Knights in the past. In 2nd edition, they could only be lawful good, human, and faithfully serve a god. Those paladins had no oath. In 3rd editions, oaths were still not a thing, but paladins could now be non-human and their alignment had to match their deity's alignment closely, thus now paladins could be other alignments. BG3 is based in fifth edition, which modified the paladins yet again to take away their religious ties and replace it with an oath. All the changes in paladins in every edition was to make them easier to play and more universal. Of course, this changed the world of Faerun too. No longer are paladins views with instant respect and good will by the good citizens of the common folk. In 2nd edition, a paladin was beyond reproach and the fact that you were a paladin sufficient to instantly gain respect and compliance from any guard or magistrate. Now in 5th edition, paladins are afforded no special treatment because their are no longer any requirements associated with paladins that mean anything. Even their oaths can be broken and they will simply remain a paladin of a different type. Paladins evolved in DnD to both give up roleplay restrictions and, in return, surrender all their roleplay advantages. I hate the new paladins but I do know how they became what they became.

[Knightmage Bael]

Originally posted by Frostblud:

Paladins have always been Holy Knights in the past.

Yes they have. Its quite possible one of the decisions behind removing the requirement of a deity is to try avoid making people uncomfortable who WANT to play a Paladin, but are otherwise uncomfortable or don't like the existence of gods - because many people want to fight for justice, but they don't want (or need) a "higher being" telling them what they should believe in (or that certain ethics are good or bad) or trying to interject and control the direction of their life in some way. Which is totally and completely O.K and should not be criticized if that's how they choose to live their life.

It brings in considerations with people IRL.

The problem is when you create a fantasy world where gods are not just some esoteric existence, but definitely there, and that normal people in their respective world all hold the idea of worshiping a divine power to be something valuable (because there are clear effects from them). Especially if that divine power holds an influence in the struggle against a sadistic force like demons. In most of the worlds created for D&D (and Pathfinder too), "good vs evil" isn't an esoteric concept like it is in IRL Earth here. Its represents real forces in other planes who struggle in an eternal conflict.

There are even ways in the Tabletop setting to actually travel to other Planes.

What I'm saying is that its a totally different circumstance of existence for people in The Forgotten Realms (see: Faerun) compared to RL Earth. The setting works in a specific way involving Deities, which is why neglecting having *even an option, whether or not its actually used in game* for a class that for literally decades of Tabletop games, has specifically described Paladins as "Holy Knights" which use "Divine Spells" suddenly not require the dedication to any form of deity, is awkward.

If you have the setting for your tabletop game and you don't want Gods, that's fine, but then you'd need to figure out a way to access spells that are specifically described as being divine. They'd have to come from another source,

The Forgotten Realms ( or Faerun) have Planes of existence with divine and occult beings who provide a very real sense of power, and its central to the lore of the world Baldur's Gate takes place in.