Basically, what the headline says. In the Forgotten Realms worshipping a deity is a major thing, to the point that if you don't you basically get punished for eternity i the afterlife (I know, it sucks, I didn't make the rules!) and aside from that, it could and should in my opinion also be something that could come up in NPC conversations, even if it was just a few lines and options here and there.

I'm curious as I don't know much about this. Is there a 5e source for this?

I half-agree: I think everyone should have an option to choose a deity. While atheism in this setting is rather silly, not every character is particularly religious. It's more about worship than belief. But yes, Clerics shouldn't be the only ones to be able to be devoted to a deity,

Well, everyone (almost) ARE worshiping a deity.
However that doesn't mean everyone should act like a zealose priests. Folks usually gives a prays to gods of their choice in privacy. And visit a shines only when it's comfortable for them.
And then of course there are entities that will never would worship anyone, like illithids or aboleths. Who think themself too good to worship any deity. And in case of aboleths, they also won't get punished in afterlife, as technically their lives never ends.

I'm alright with this, but then I want the option to NOT worship anything. Also, the deity thing is implied in a lot of the origin option you choose in character creation.

Yes!

The issue of players not familiar with forgotten realms can be solved with the well written small descriptions of dieties already in the character creation.
More unrealistic idea. Larian could actually put a "recommended" option based on race/class as they've done with stat allocations.

*adjusts nerd glasses* Ackchyully... illithids are in a way religious. They have their patron Ilsensine, and there's also an illithid deity of knowledge, Maanzecorian.

It would be pretty cool if the PC could convert to Ilsensine, haha. "I, for one, welcome our tentacled lord and saviour."

agree

Decided I'd come around to say this and instead I'm bumping this. I'm thinking about what a bummer it is to be effectively agnostic because I'm not a Priest in Pillars of Eternity. It really kills roleplay when everyone else has deities and you have none.

Yes this should be a thing.
Also please add the elemental lords to be worshipable deities please.
Kossuth, lord of Fire -> this guy is a must, he has a HUGE, very organized and very influential church and he is also very involved in the prime material plane.
Akadi, lord of Air
Isisthia, lord of Water
Grumbar, lord of Earth

Also it's very weird how we have minor deities, but Lanthander didn't make the list, even though he has a huge following.

You can choose not to worship any god. At death you’ll end up on the Fugue? Wall. There you just slowly dissolve away into nothingness.

Obviously clerics must have a deity to worship since their power comes from gods.

I agree every character should have a choice. It’d be pretty awesome if your choice affects some dialogue.

Missing Lathander is a bit odd since he’s definitely Light domain. Some gods I get since their domains are not available yet like Torm and war domain.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Forgotten_...woods_twitter_replies_september_updated/

Greenwood -

Hi!

In the Realms, all sane sentient beings “believe” in the gods (= know they exist and affect the world), because they have seen avatars or divine servitor beings (e.g. aasimars, celestials) and/or see signs and spells from the gods and/or been shown dramatic evidence of past manifestations of divine power (e.g. a god blasting apart a mountain with magic “from the sky”) and/or seen priests work real, lasting magic through prayer to their deities.

So everyone in the Realms “believes” (they KNOW the gods are real). “Faith” has two real-world meanings: the collective one of “everyone who believes in this god or this pantheon or this creed” (clergy and lay worshippers), and “believing in a deity without hard proof” and therefore taking the existence of the deity “on faith.” In the Realms, the first meaning is widely used and understood, the second is not (why? See above).

“Worship” means doing as the god wants you to (or the god’s clergy tell you to), working to advance the aims of the god (which might even mean fighting on behalf of the god), and making offerings to the church (coins or items), and taking part in rituals and prayers.

In the Realms, everyone ‘believes in’ ALL of the gods, and although a lot of humans (priests, paladins, and lay worshippers) ‘specialize’ in one god (worshipping that one deity more than others), most sentient beings do at least a little worshipping of many deities: a merchant wanting business success would pray and give offerings to Waukeen, and if that merchant is shipping goods aboard on a ship, would also pray and give offerings to Umberlee to NOT sink the ship, and if that same merchant was trying to use new technology to make their goods faster or better or both, he or she would also pray and give offerings to Gond, and so on. So you can see that there’s a lot of ‘lip-service’ worship of deities by people who otherwise don’t care overmuch about that god or their faith. The gods want obedience AND worship because they gain power the more they are worshipped and have influence in the mortal world, so YES, they would count someone participating in celebration of one of their holy days as worship.

In the Realms, deities have portfolios, and Tempus is the god of war and warcraft, just as Mystra is the goddess of (arcane) magic. A mortal can be a great general or a powerful spellcaster without actively worshipping Tempus or Mystra, respectively. The deity will manipulate that mortal, and exploit that mortal’s achievements, to increase their divine influence. So, yes, they would still count the deeds of that mortal as worship—but they would also constantly send clergy AND dream-visions to that mortal to try to entice the mortal to “embrace” (openly worship) them.

Mortals aren’t required to like the creed or world-view of a deity (though the deity would prefer that they love the deity and the deity’s ways) so much as the deity wants them to obey (behave in certain ways), and donating coins to a temple is definitely worship.

And there are many mortals who respect the clergy, teachings, and deeds of a particular god, but don’t entrust their lives to the god, or formally dedicate their souls to that god or any god. Deities always want souls and lives dedicated to them if possible, but they’ll unhesitatingly take respect and the above-mentioned lip-service worship (including donating a few coins from time to time) as worship, even from a mortal who refuses to dedicate themselves. They will also tirelessly try to persuade that mortal to accept them more fully.

Hope this is of help!

I should add that the “dream visions” sent by gods to sleeping mortals often include the deity appearing to the mortal directly in their dreams, speaking to them (advice, commands, cryptic hints), and that all deities employ “manifestations” (glows or visible-to-all temporary images moving in the air, smells, and visitations by birds or creatures associated with the deity, etc.) of their favour or disfavour or interest, that awake people can see. These usually appear above altars during prayers, or at a spot where someone has just made or is making a sacrifice to the god (including sacrificing their mortal lives), but can also appear elsewhere, to convince or reassure non-believers or mortals who doubt what the right thing to do is.

And the wall of the faithless:



If those mortals never embrace any deity in life, when they final face Kelemvor in the City of Judgement, what fate will befall them?
Please forgive me for asking so many questions. The topic of Faithless has aroused considerable controversy among Chinese FR fans😅

— coolguy (@coolguy73360922) October 1, 2019

1)
There’s nothing to forgive! Ask all you like. Some answers will take longer, though, or even be blocked by the dreaded NDAs.
If a mortal doesn’t worship a specific deity in life, they are not Faithless. The Realms is 2)
…pantheistic, not monotheistic. If a mortal doesn’t worship ANY deities at any time in life, rejecting gods as not worthy of worship or as “not gods,” they ARE Faithless (Kelemvor judges), and their fate is to be bound into…#Realmslore

— Ed Greenwood (@TheEdVerse) October 1, 2019

3)
…the Wall of Faithless by a green mold that only binds Faithless into the wall. Over time, the soul of a Faithless dissolves into the Wall, and is lost forever.
However, demons steal souls from the Wall, dissolving the mold by 4)
…various means, and take them back to the Abyss (this is one way that demons propagate).
If a demon steals a soul from the Wall that any deity is interested in, for any reason, that deity may send servitor beings to battle the…#Realmslore

— Ed Greenwood (@TheEdVerse) October 1, 2019

5)
…demon and wrest the soul from it, giving that soul ‘another chance’ in a new body. This often happens to adventurers, or spellcasters who in life devise new spells, or anyone who does something creative and daring. They are 6)
…reborn into a new body and life, as the deity who ‘rescued’ them watches to see what they do in this new life. (Mortals provide the main source of entertainment for the gods.)
Kelemvor judges some souls to be False rather than…#Realmslore

— Ed Greenwood (@TheEdVerse) October 1, 2019

7)
…Faithless. These are the souls of mortals who deliberately betrayed deities after making a commitment to those deities. The False are punished for all eternity (which sometimes means forever, but in very rare cases means 8)
…until a deity sends servitors to ‘harvest’ them for a new life [again, another chance for the soul]. The severity of punishments fit the severity of the crimes against the deity during life, and vary from hideous tortures…#Realmslore

— Ed Greenwood (@TheEdVerse) October 1, 2019

9)
…that would result in death if done to a live mortal (like slow dismemberment), to attentively escorting and caring for visitors to Kelemvor’s City of Judgment that the soul in life would dislike or despise (e.g. due to family 10)
…or racial hatreds). Kelemvor himself has been known to (for unknown reasons) pluck certain souls away from the usual fates of his judgments, to serve him. Often they end up sent back into mortal life on missions, often in…#Realmslore

— Ed Greenwood (@TheEdVerse) October 1, 2019

11)
…bodies of a different race and/or gender than that of their previous life.#Realmslore

— Ed Greenwood (@TheEdVerse) October 1, 2019

Good lore, KillerRabbit, I was just debating going into depth on that and you've done a very good job of it already ^.^ Thanks!

I really think that players should have an option in character creation to choose whether they follow a particular deity or no specific deity, or even to declare as faithless if they wish. It should not be locked to just Clerics. As an added extra, it'll be worth remembering that Paladins are not bound to necessarily serve a particular deity any more, so Paladins should not be formally required to pick a deity any more than anyone else is.

Well wouldn't paladins without a deity be just knights with a vow? Where would their divine powers come from?

The source of their power can vary. Regardless, it is canon that Paladins don't strictly need deities these days. I'd recommend having a read of the entry from the player's handbook.

Actually, to curtail argument, here, I'll just print it for you:


Gods feature frequently and often in Paladin stories, but it is only a 'Many do' situation now; their power comes from their commitment and their dedication to an oath or cause, or to their vision of righteousness. Deities need not be involved any more. Their power is a divine power, certainly, but in many cases it is pure divine force, not tethered to or channeled through a particular deity.

I’d argue it depends upon the world setting. In Eberron, the gods are almost abstract concepts. So paladins don’t need a clear divine source.

Forgotten Realms, the gods are very much real and do provide divine powers. I don’t see how a paladin in FR could have powers without a god providing their powers.

Personally this makes absolutely zero sense to me. A paladin who is devolted to the ideal of justice is de-facto devoted to Tyr, even if it's not made explicit.
In order to make this work he would have to explicitly renounce the gods which would make it impossible for him to be devoted to justice, because he does so unilaterally without giving the gods their due, as such, a paladin devoted to justice without paying his due to the deity that makes justice a thing is an oxymoron, because that would be unjust.
If a paladin is dedicated to something that is included in the porfolio of a deity, then the paladin serves the cause of that deity and as such he serves that deity as well. All divine powers must also come from that deity then.

Th small things that add to immersion/roleplay is important.

Having a diety choice for all PCs so it triggers the dialogues and just, more building characters is important. If the triggers are already there for clerics, it makes sense to open them up to all characters (espec as the second(1st do we count prologue?) NPC you can recruit, is cleric).
It's a dnd thing too. To have all the values for roleplaying, not just the ones mechanically relevant.

Should definetly have all the clerics goods + a non observant option
Even if it doesn't trigger the deity choice dialogues it ought still be there for RP

I mean,... you guys don't have to like it or agree with it. If it doesn't work for your tables,then that's what's most important... but I'm just quoting to you the relevant passages here, as the basic facts of how it is written in 5e. You don't need a god, as written.



Many, not all or or universally required.


Paladin following an oath and a creed, not a deity.


More in-text examples that don't involve deities.

There's a pronounced difference between smiting someone "In Tyr's name" and smiting someone "Because it is just". The difference may not make sense to some people, but it's an important one all the same. Certainly, a Paladin acting justly would be taken as performing acts that honoured Tyr - Tyr would certainly say so, and take that as a source of power happily (and as mentioned, would likely try to sway the paladin to speak their name and follow them directly)... but there's still an important personal difference, which now, in 5e, we are allowed to have and to explore, where previously we were not.

Imagine a situation where Tyr fell; where Tyr was driven to act unjustly and lost control of his folio of justice. The Paladin who devoted themselves to Tyr would either need to follow the new Tyr to continue to receive powers, perhaps being driven to injustice themselves as a result, or they would need to renounce or break their oath and swear a new one if they felt they couldn't follow him any more. A Paladin without a particular deity, sworn to an oath that bade them act justly, uphold the good and to fight injustice and evil wherever they find it, but without a particular god in mind, would NOT be in the same position; they would be unaffected by Tyr's fall.

Yeah it is written like that to be polite to god-haters, but the truth is that if you accept that you can be a paladin without serving a deity, you basically admit that the portfolio system is nonsense and you can just pull magic out of your behind just because.

Also if Tyr died, another deity would rise to take his place and porfolio (this actually happened, Tyr did die and gave all his power and portfolios to Torm). A paladin devoted to Tyr would probably get a chance to accept Torm (whose portfolio included "paladins") or serve him by proxy of serving justice.

You can't really get around this without breaking the lore tbh.

Ah ! I was going to write that at some point, but digging up the thread is probably better.

Massive +1 here. Everyone should be able to choose a deity.

Of course, the list would contain "none", so people who want to play a character who doesn't worship anyone can easily do so.


Beside the obvious consequence of seeing this choice on the character sheet, which is pleasing in itself, it could lead to some dialogue options.

+1 please give all char the choice to choose a deity, all these little things can make custom chars feel a little more personal (especially if this can lead to small dialogue additions)

Inflamatory rhetoric aside, no: it's written like that because that's how it is.

Paladins used to be alignment locked into being lawful good. Now they aren't. Most still are, but it's not actually a requirement any more.
Paladins used to absolutely require a divine proxy in order to channel divine power. Now they don't. Most still do, but it's not a requirement any more.

As KillerRabbit posted, paladins and other individuals who act in ways that fall inside the tenets or domains of a deity's folio are genuinely acknowledged by that deity, and that deity does indeed receive support for their folio by those actions; that is not in question. The paladin in question, however, does not need to acknowledge any deity or pray to any deity, or act overtly in any deity's name, not any more. It seems, perhaps, since the second sundering and the reordering of many aspects of the material and the divine, it is now entirely feasible for mortals with sufficient conviction and dedication - with sufficient faith in what they personally stand for, to tap divine power to fuel their quest; their actions will almost certainly be taken by one deity or another as actions that support them or their folio, but the individual paladin is not affected by this. Indeed, such cases are common enough these days that special note was made of the fact - that deities will often visit and try to sway stand out individuals, and convince them to invoke their name directly.


You, uh... you realise that what I'm quoting... that stuff that I'm quoting? That's 'the lore'.
It doesn't break the lore; it IS the lore.
Like I said, you don't have to agree with it, and if it doesn't work for you or your table that's fine, don't use it... but it is what it is. If you want to talk about what the present day lore actually says, it's what I'm quoting.
You have an image in your mind about how it all works. That image is perfectly fine - but it is not cognisant with the current statement of the lore.

I really do just want to see the full realms pantheon (all of them) available for choosing, for everyone. I've got a young barbarian who just won't feel like she's got someone watching her back, if she can't give her thanks to Arvoreen in the quiet moments far from the bounds of home.

Paladins and Clerics, or other divine casters, have not had to serve a specific deity since at least 3.5 in the generic DnD rules -- a concept or virtue was enough. Forgotten Realms however have had special setting rules that in it you need to be devoted to a deity to gain divine magic.

I'm pretty sure that special setting rule no longer carries weight since they pretty much did made FR the generic standard setting in 5e. But regardless there is nothing new about divine casters being able to cast without following gods.

As for 5e Paladins, I think it is safe to say that as a general rule the divinely associated Paladins are still the most common. But in this edition the power-granting aspect is the oath they've sworn -- possibly to a deity, but not necessarily -- rather than direct worship.

Thanks for all those info.
I got some things:

about souls:
From the text I get the feeling that a soul is an entity of its own, so it can perceive its environment, communicate with others, it remembers its past life and it has feelings, so it can feel pain or joy.
- At what point loses a soul its old personality, since most people do not remember their former lives?
- How or when do the gods put a soul into a child or embryo?
- Does a watcher from PoE make sense in the DnD setting? (somebody who can remember his past lives and who can see the past lives of others)

About paladins
I like the paladins of 5E more than those of former editions. I am sure that gods who are not LG would like to have people who fight for them the way paladins do. Until BG3 came (my first contact with 5E) I felt paladins were too limited and I loved the PoE version of them, so you have different subclasses with different "alignment".

My only dislike for non-good Paladins is that they're still called "Paladins". They should have renamed the class "Oathbound" or "Oathkeeper" or something.

I do think that no matter what class you are playing you should have the option to pick a deity or pick no deity

From the roleplaying point of view the agnostic or atheist option has immense potential: the middle age set that is the base for D&D implies that being doubtful about deities or explicity don't believe in them is something anyone would dare to think to be open with.

To see how the various believers react to [agnostic]/[atheist] dialogue lines would be interesting.

But just like some remarks from the banned one it could be a very inflamatory and divisive material. So I think it's best to follow the rules (also because there are some interesting deities in DnD, and the variety of them allows to really surprising character backgrounds).

I do agree with the user that stated that for specific races, like Drows or Thieflings, there should be the "recommended" deity to follow.

In my table top game the only players I require to have a deity are those whos spell powers come from a God
However, everyone in my group has declared a deity. And it does not matter because your god is not going to save you, in my game.
But I require them to declare a deity, and then I examine the deity and if they do things they should not they may lose powers.

I agree everyone should have a deity in this game and in real life I am against Atheism and I believe in God. However this is about a game. Divine spellcasters get their power through a deity.

Keep in mind that atheism doesn't have the same meaning in the realms as it does in our world. There isn't anyone who doubts in the existence of the gods, or who doesn't believe in them, any more than there are people who do not believe that rocks fall downwards when dropper, or that the sky looks blue on clear days. They are a known, quantifiable fact of the world, and only the deblitatingly insane do not believe in them. It would be like not believing that cows exist, when you can go to market and see them in front of you. There is no doubt and no question here; it is overtly true and everyone knows it.

Rather, in the realms, atheists are people who, for whatever reason, do not believe that any of the gods are worthy of giving thanks, acts or deeds towards; that none are worth respect or worship, and who makes an active choice not to do so, and also (and this matters), to deny the gods any claim to their deeds and actions. There are no casual atheists; even people who don't actively worship a particular god still know, as factual truth, that they exist and that they have power; a farmer may politely ask Chauntea for good favour when sowing crops, or thank her for a good harvest, but that farmer doesn't actively worship her in any direct way... it's still sufficient. Even people who live their lives and never really think about the gods will generally still act in ways that some deities can take as worthy action. Being an atheist is something you've really got to dedicate yourself to, ironically, more than passively acknowledging various deities well enough to keep yourself out of The Wall of the Faithless, which is where all dedicated atheists end up. It's not nice.

Not to say that it shouldn't be an option, but it's a big, big deal, because it means a lot more than it does in our world.

Well said. +1

I don’t think “atheist” or “agnostic” should be a character option, just because providing it is liable to give players unfamiliar with Forgotten Realms the wrong idea about the lore of the setting. “Faithless” might be more interesting, as it keeps to the lore, without suggesting “I just don’t know if Selûne exists” is something anyone but the most deluded, possibly insane, would ever think. I am sure someone in the Forgotten Realms thinks like that, but putting it in as a character option gives the impression it’s a position reasonable to hold. I support the idea of all characters being able to choose a god they are more dedicated to, without requiring it.

I want the option, as I would always want to choose one.
Heck, Creating a Character in NW2 gave me an idea for an entire Race and Deity of my own design.
Just because I had the option (Although to be fair, said character WAS a cleric.).

"Faithless" with a descriptive blurb of what that means, in amongst deity choices, would be a good way of doing this, which I'd support.

Well in Neverwinter Nights 2 you could pick a deity no matter what class you pick which is what I am hoping for in BG3 otherwise it's going to be like PK where every other npc can pick a deity but you can't which I find to be very odd the only way you could pick a deity in PK is being a divine spellcaster

A perfect solution. Hope you are listening, Larian.

+1 for Patron Deity options for all, with none as an option, Faithless as a specifically anti deities option would be interesting as well.

Would like to see this happen, as long as they add in all the possible deities first.

Faithless is the none option in Faerun. It's one thing to not worship any god but you basically can't deny the existence of gods when they actively involve themselves in the affairs of mortals.

Tell that to Gann of Dreams he pretty much outright denies the existence of deities but than you have the other side that thinks it is a waste of time to worship any deity Warlocks most often think this way because they deal with outsiders why worship them when you can make a deal with them?

Just a cursory search on Google (since it's been forever since I touched NWN2) tells me Gann doesn't respect or worship gods because they are not worthy of it, which makes him Faithless. As I said, in Faerun, gods are very real. To deny that would make you delusional in that world. The setting does not allow any other reasoning.

I do agree with you it is very delusional for people not to believe in deities in Faerun but people can be very delusional which is why the wall of the faithless exists

A very big flaw in my argument the fact that I didn't take account of the fact that in Faerun deities show their presence that is for an atheist or agnostic there is full of actual facts that prove the existence of gods, that means that our vision of atheism and agnosticism can not be translated do a DnD world.

Nevertheless I think that the "no deity" option should be there, because, in my opinion, there could be people in Faerun that believe the sentient races of Faerun should be free from the interference of the gods, that if wars (intra or inter races) have to be it has to be because the various race factions decide to go to war and not because a plot from some deity, that if someone has to excel in some activity it has to be because their effort and talent and not because they paid a god, and so on, again I'm thinking about the value from a roleplaying point of view, such a character would be seen as eccentric, revolutionary, dangerous, delusional, thus a lot of possible dialogue options and reactions open.

The main issue with not worshipping a deity in Forgotten Realms is that when you die, you are done for. Your soul goes to the Wall of the Faithless, to either be claimed by demons or devils eventually (in the bad way) or to just slowly assimilate into the wall and go into oblivion.

While the No Deity option should maybe be possible, it also would mean that when you die, it is game over because your soul is stuck in the Wall and you cannot be raised from the dead or resurrected. Even Revivify would not work and there is little the gods themselves can do either.

man this is factually WRONG the wall of the faithless wasn't created to "punish" those who refused to worship gods, it was created by Myrkul who was the god of the dead after Jergal and its purpose was to not only to force mortals to worship out of fear but to make sure they remember him if he ever got killed, after all gods in dnd don't truly die while there is still someone that remembers them and what better way to claim his place in history than by creating the biggest cosmic abomination against mortals, heck the freaking wall isn't even necessary for Forgotten Realms cosmology it wasn't there originally it was something that Myrkul did out of his overwhelming douchebaggery, the cosmology would still work just fine if the damn wall wasn't there, then the souls of the faithless would most likely go to the outer plane most matching to their beliefs, you know just like EVERY OTHER SETTING OF DND BESIDES EBERRON (that one is another clusterfuck, because there EVERYONE gets the wall of the faithless treatment, Forgotten Realms is the ONLY setting where souls are siphoned to the fugue plane and ONLY because of Myrkul's doing), also the image you are using comes from the game where part of the story is to get RID OF THE FLIPPING WALL and if only Wizards of the Coast weren't such prissy little A-holes to Obsidian back in the day then the ending would have been the utter destruction of the biggest mistake ever added to this setting, the wall is NOT compelling people its bullshit, and the fact that the so called "good gods" of the setting haven't done anything to push for its removal, puts a BIG question mark on whether they are truly good or even actually worthy of worship AT ALL, after all they are condemming people to extreme spiritual torture and being doomed to dissolving into inexistence JUST because they don't want to become their pawns (because that's what mortals are for the gods of Forgotten Realms, mere pawns), the whole thing is nothing more than pure and disgusting spiritual blackmail, and if any of you are actually fine with any of it then there is something wrong with you, i for one want the choice to tell "godly" A-holes where to shove it.

It would be neat to properly express the personal beliefs of your character yeah.

Not everybody must be out there "Crusading or Clericing"
too believe in Helm or Tyr for example - which are both quite popular I feel.

That's not how it works. The souls travel rather slowly to City of Judgment / Fugue Plane. Once the soul reaches it, it's late for revivifying/raising regardless of their (lack of) faith. Revivifying/raising a faithless works fine. However, something like (True) Resurrection is a different beast, provided longer time has passed - by that time, the soul might very well be stuck in the Wall and therefore not free.

I don't think anyone said it was there to punish people... just that it was there and was a thing.


Yep, that's absolutely correct. It doesn't need to be there, and indeed MOST of the neutral and good aligned deities in the realms pantheon are against it existing.... they can't do anything about it because there are divine laws about deities interceding directly on the folios of other gods, and countermanding their 'works'. For a while it didn't exist any more, because Myrkul was out of the picture, but sadly he's back again and so is it, as far as our latest sources say, I believe. Nobody, god or mortal, wants it to exist except Myrkul, more or less.

In terms of resurrecting and the like, the wall has functionally no impact on the mechanics - it takes longer for a soul to become unrecognisable and unclaimable by resurrection than all but the longest timeframe options, and the longest one is reality-warping magic that can absolutely restore whatever remains of a soul trapped for that long... however, if you play in a game where you acknowledge the wall, and you have a faithless person in your group, it may be worth thinking about their experience if they are dead for more than a few days, but do get returned to life; there's going to be some unpleasantness, no doubt.

The way I think of it is that being divine has power in it self and the concepts like justice is a different source of power but is compatible in either additive or multiplicative way. Hence portfolio's can be fought for.

Using that, a paladin can follow the concept and use it as a catalyst to channel the power of the god who is governing it at the time. So technically the oath can be to the concept and not necessarily the god. The God gets the benefits regardless.

Asking to choose a deity is really the same as alignment to a certain degree. I'd rather not be a slave to anything good or bad. I'm spiritual rather than religious and unless you think for story reasons you will die permanently, be sent to that gloom city, be there long enough to be harassed by devil contracts and curious celestials, then put on trial; I don't think it matters to pick a deity unless you are a cleric specifically. Hell, even Oath of vengeance Paladin's straight up have nothing to do with deities.

It's pointless. Not as silly as being atheist or agnostic in dnd but still kind of silly. I mean really at one point Ao forced gods to be on faerun. Priest probably had heart attacks of joy. Even the evil ones lol.

That's how I think of it. Overall I'm against picking a deity. If an angel, god, or celestial wants to help me then sure whatever, but I'm not kissing anyones ass, feet, or whatever brown nose technique a mo fo comes up with. At that point I'd pick a fighter instead of a paladin, for example. Also why i'll never play warlock or cleric.

I think that you can pick a deity without being a cleric, but it doesn't influence anything (that I know of). Here's how to try: Start a character; pick cleric; pick a deity; choose another class. Now, go back to cleric and see if the deity you picked was retained. If so, chances are the deity=[whatever] tag stays in the character even if it isn't displayed.

[edit] It doesn't work, darn it. Deity resets every time class is changed off of cleric.

I agree, everyone should have a deity.

I completely agree. Would help a lot with immersion and give out character some kind of alignment based on which deity they worship. It could provide interesting dialogue branches and even affect those short scenes we get when alone at camp. Maybe our character could pray or ask for their god's blessing/express their doubts to them and ask for advice. Even if no answer comes, it's a good chance to give custom characters a bit more depth.

You really need to read the avatar books to get why the wall of the faithless still exists Kelemvor even tried to get rid of it but it backfired on him so Kelemvor had to put back the wall of the faithless he even says in Neverwinter Nights 2 Mask of the Betrayer that if Kelemvor removed the wall again all of the deities would move against him Kelemvor is a powerful deity but he would have no chance of winning a battle with all of the deities that would try to kill him Kelemvor does not want the wall of the faithless but it is a necessary evil because people would stop worshiping deities and deities need worshipers to live without worshipers a deity would die this is why all of the deities want to keep the wall of the faithless around I don't agree with it but it is what it is you could say that before the time of troubles the wall of the faithless was not needed but with Ao new law making that now a deity needs worshipers it is very necessary for the wall of the faithless to exist if you still do not want the wall of the faithless in Forgotten Realms than you need to take it up with Wizards of the Coast they are the ones who made the wall of the faithless cannon in Forgotten Realms

Yes, Kelemvor does not like the wall, but he can't get rid of it.

BUT! he can make it harder to get sent to the Wall than it was in previous editions. These days, if you don't worship any deitys out of ignorance, or because you never had a cause to do so, but you otherwise have nothing against the gods and have never stopped anyone else from worshiping then you don't get the Wall, you go to an afterlife on the plane that most matches your alignment.

You have to be really anti-deity these days to get the Wall, or be one of those people that does all the motions of worship, but doesn't actually believe in or respect the gods, or be subverting worship for your own personal gain (like corrupt priest using his followers belief to line his own pockets, and he doesn't believe or care).

Agreed he could make it harder for people to get sent to the wall of the faithless my way of dealing with the faithless is by reincarnating them but with no memory of who they was in their past life I would have the starting age of the reincarnated faithless to be a infant but that's how I would deal with it

Yes, everyone should pick a God and that list should include Lathander dangit

1+ for this suggestion. I would like everyone to be able to choose the deity they profess (or lack thereof) when creating a character, even if the plot and mechanics would not change anything (although it would be great to be able to do some activities related to the deity or have additional dialogue options). After all, when we choose a character's appearance, it doesn't really matter much either. As far as I know, if I create a character with pink hair and brown skin no NPC will comment on it, but I will do it anyway because I want to, because it helps me feel better about my character. It should be the same with the deity. Whether I'm a priest or a thief, I want to be able to choose a god and at least imagine my character praying to him. And if I decide to play a male drow who, after a bad experience with the priestesses of Lolth, is fed up with gods and refuses to worship any, then I wish to be able to do so.
I really liked that NwN2 had so many different gods to choose from for each class, even though they had virtually no meaning in the game. There was even a Gargauth about which little was written in Player's Handbook 3e. I wish Baldur's Gate 3 also had so many deities to choose from + Archdevils and Demon Lords.