Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Paladin class NEEDS Deity Choice!

Deities and divine folios are far more fluid and changeable than our real-world conception of deities often is. The basic principle is that, as part of the way the realms works, as determined by Ao (the extremely hands-off over-deity that created the realms, or is believed to have - basically the distant and silent god of the gods), every principle behoves representation, and the upholding of principles in the world grants them importance and strength, and capacity for how much power they hold over the realms. Exactly what principles are independently represented, what principles are folded into one another or split off from one another is mutable. These are what we generally use the word folio to represent; folios cannot be 'created' or 'destroyed' in any true sense, merely subsumed or divided. They are insentient elements of how divine power works.

Divinities come into play as the holders and controllers of divine folios; Deities stake their claim as representing or championing these principles, and either through direct conflict with other deities, or from a sufficient base of worshippers, can take control of one of these folios and claim it as theirs. That deity then controls that 'sphere of influence'; they are made more powerful by those who strengthen and uphold that principle, as well as by those who worship them directly. They are also responsible for portioning out power to those who rely on that folio, who champion it, or again, who worship them directly.

Deities are sentient and sapient (for the most part), and are 'people', often in a very human-like, petty greek-mythology way, in fact, and they fight and disagree, have arguments and romances, form alliances and plot against one another. But, as long as a Deity exists at a deity-like level, and as long as they control a divine folio of some sort, they are beholden to the belief and worship of mortals, and that has the very real capacity to change them. A mortal that ascends to deityhood and takes control of a divine folio can then find themselves altered and changed by the belief and practices of the people who pray for things or to deities they believe in, in relation to that folio.

This means that you can have situations where divine entities who are each worshipped for the same purpose in different realms can end up being blended together and becoming a single individual, entirely against their own independent wills. This has happened many times, in fact. the reverse can also happen, if individual worshippers of particular deity are strong and numerous enough to make that aspect dominant, or to allow it to pull away and become independent of a greater deity whole that it was once subsumed into. It's actually pretty dangerous trying to maintain your individuality while being a god, as it turns out, and this is in large part why many of our most primary deities are very eager to have as many folks following and worshipping them, in their own image, as they can.

When deities fight over folios, if one is not defeated and destroyed, or subsumed together, those folios can be split, into some of their more component aspects, allowing each deity to retain a part of the domain for themselves and continue to exist independently. Once we had a single folio 'Death', that was a massive single folio that covered everything related to death, more or less. But, we have, and have had, many deities and deity-like figures who existed at one time or another, were worshipped by different peoples, or who rose in conflict with one another - as well as various mortals throwing their hats into the ring as well - it's a folio that has been fought over possibly more than any other. What that means is that today, we have individual folios for: Death, The Dead, The Transition From Life Into Death, Murder, Accidental Death, The Afterlife, the Records of the Dead, Death By Old Age, The Grave, the Journey of Death... all of which should not be confused with the domains of Undeath, The Undead, and a handful of other folios revolving around undead and necromancy, which the majority of the death domain folios are opposed to. In short... when gods fight over a folio, and they all have the strength to exist and endure independently, it can get very messy.

Power to affect the realms exists in everything; it's the raw stuff that everything is made up of in some way - not entirely unlike descriptions of the force, if that helps. In this form it is normally entirely inaccessible and cannot be tapped or drawn on or utilised in any way (Usually; special circumstances apply, and most folks who do find a way or end up in a situation of doing so are usually burnt to a cinder just by its raw and unfettered force); this is the raw magic of which existence is formed.

The Weave exists as something like a cheesecloth - between people who would use power, and the raw uncontrolled power itself. The Weave is what spellcasters interact with in order to effect change in the world and draw power into effect; shaping the weave in an area or in particular way manipulates the raw magic of the space in particular, more controlled, ways.

This is where Wizards step in; they have learned and studied the ways in which their actions, words and reagents,when used in very specific ways, can shape and form the weave, and thus elicit effects in the world around them. They are not intrinsically magical themselves, and don't have any actual innate magic power. They operate on the raw intellect needed to understand, memorise and repeat these incredibly precise workings, to cause effects; they build the scaffolding and the pipes, with the certain knowledge that if they do, the power will flow through into the shape that they built.

However, we're not talking about wizards ^.^

Without that specific learning, most folks couldn't really touch the wave, or affect magic in the world. Instead, they require an intermediary to handle the shaping of the weave for them, and to channel that power back to them so they can affect the world around them.

Clerics have a divine connection; they have a spiritual link to their deity that is a real and tangible thing, more than just 'faith'. The Strength of that connection is what controls, in part, how powerful a cleric is, and clerics with a more robust connection can channel more of their deity's power without burning themselves out. The other factor is, of course, how much power their deity wants to grant them. This is still deliberately 'fuzzy' in its mechanic, but the basic shape of it is that, unable to affect the weave themselves, the cleric draws upon their divine connection to their deity, opening it and seeking power to act from that deity. The deity handles the shaping of the weave using their own power and sends it back 'pre-packaged' to the cleric to actualise and direct into the world; they are using divine power to manipulate magic around them.

Warlocks do a similar thing - their patron handles the weaving, for the most part, and it works much in the same way - though you'll probably offend a lot of clerics if you say as much out loud.

Paladins (and Druids) are also ones who draw on divine power to handle the weaving for them, but how this works can vary. For MOST Paladins, and for Many Druids, it works exactly as it does for clerics - they follow a deity, and they seek that deity's assistance for their divine acts. However, Paladins main focus is to oath and principle, rather than to specific deities. For most, this goes hand in hand and the twain never part... but in a situation where a deity is changed by some conflict, falls or is corrupted, a Cleric would need to continue to follow their deity to maintain their powers, becoming a different sort of cleric, while a Paladin would instead come apart from that deity, either finding a new one that still upholds their ideals and oaths, or simply working by their oath alone. This is because, as it works in the realms now, a paladin is fundamentally different from a cleric, in that their connection is to the folios themselves, by way of the oaths they swear. In most cases, this is still the direct purview of a deity, and functionally indistinguishable from it. They still have a divine connection, and they still channel divine power that shapes the weave at their behest, whether that power comes from a divine folio unattended by a deity, from a deity attending their request, or as is often the case for Paladins who don't worship specific deities, whether their actions are sponsored by a deity indirectly.

That last one could do with an extra couple of sentences... Individual divine folio have presence and strength, and this is supported by the worship, belief, prayers and actions of mortals. A champion who upholds justice in their every act and deed is indirectly strengthening the justice domain, the folios related to it, and the deities that hold those folios, and thus, several deities may consider it in their own good interests to support this champion in their actions; though the champion is not worshipping them directly, they are still supporting them and the folio they hold, and so one or possibly several of those deities may happily handle the channelling of divine power to that champion, as long as they continue to act in a way that empowers them. This is part of the somewhat more subtle and somewhat more hands-off presence that deities have had since the second sundering. It may change again the next time we have a major realms-shaking event.

Yes, it's fuzzy and doesn't answer every question - I won't pretend it's not. I will suggest, however, that it is intended to be somewhat fuzzy by design, to allow individual tables, DMs and players to fill in the blanks in whatever way makes most sense to them and feels most comfortable to them. If, at your table, that means you don't like the idea of deity independent divine channellers, that's fine - run with that!

Don't get started on Sorcerers, who are the ones technically capable of tapping raw magic directly, and shaping it by instinct and force of will, even if the Weave is not present, and if they're lucky surviving it...

Paladins get absolution from members of their own faith typically. Yes, this is how it normally works. Because asking a divine caster to absolve you is asking for them to magically intercede on your behalf with your deity. Obviously the best results are going to be from a priest of your own faith, or failing that an allied deity. You *could* ask a divine caster of a god with a less....warm relationship with your god, or maybe to get your gods attention through deeds, but expect diminishing results. Asking a evil priest to absolve you of the sins you committed as a good paladin is not going to end well.

This is a big reason why I don't like how the oathbreaker is used in the game. Like with Withers, it's another weirdly out-of-place npc to provide convenience. Almost as immersion breaking as games where you use console commands to summon an npc or something to debug stuff. He just doesn't belong. Not this early in the game, not selling you indulgences, not offering you the power of an oathbreaker no strings attached, no effort required, no quest to absolve yourself or quest to prove yourself to a new master as an oathbreaker.

The nature of the Oath. The Oath is a sacred Oath, a religious oath made in the name of one or more gods, and it is from that (or those) deities that a Paladin's holy powers flow down from. It's a symbol of your deity placing their faith in the sincerity of a pledge that you intend to follow to your utmost in their name. If you break that? You break that trust, they take your powers. You want to skirt it close to the letter of the law? Well, that goes as far for you as your deity is willing to give your the benefit of the doubt towards your intentions. IMHO Paladin's oath should not be a clear cut 'insta fall' thing except in extreme cases, particularly in a game like this where you can't explain yourself to your DM. A lot of players I have heard complain about unexpected paladin falls. There should be a warning system or a 'three strikes you are out' thing. IMO.

If we can write "Paladins get their powers from deities", and we instead choose to write "Most Paladins get their powers from deities", that changes the meaning of what we are saying, and pointing that out is not 'hanging on a word' or 'twisting a square peg' - It's pointing out a deliberate choice that was made with intent. Insisting - and please forgive my uncharitable paraphrasing - that "It really still just means what it used to before, that's what it actually still means. They just put that word in there for no real reason, it doesn't change anything" - That, to me, is wriggling, and hanging, and twisting. So please, take a step back and ask yourself why you are doing it.

If the answer is because the realms feel better to you if you think of them that way, or because you prefer it to work that way, that's fine - great even - but your feelings on how you'd prefer it to work doesn't have any impact on how it formally does, before home-table changes come into play. Recall that the examples you gave of those 'other' possibilities all existed in the era before the second sundering when paladins were still described in hard absolutes. They did not feel the need to write in non-absolute terms to account for those special story and novel exceptions at that time, because they were exceptions to a rule that was still absolute for everyone else. The change to non-absolute terminology that came with 5e was deliberate and unrelated to any of the specific individual special outliers described in other media.

If they wanted to stifle creativity and force players to follow absolutes in particular areas, then they would do so; they used to do so very firmly in earlier editions. Instead, since 5e and since the second sundering, they use non-absolute language, and they do so consistently; that isn't by chance or laziness. It's because that is the way it is post second sundering. This it does nothing whatsoever to impact the games of other folk at their own tables who wish to play deity-sworn paladins only - no-one, at any point, has ever suggested even remotely that it's normal or common for a paladin to not follow a deity. No-one, at any point, ever, has suggested that being sworn to a particular deity is anything other than the majority case in the realms.

However, it's not the absolute case any more - and it has not been for the past decade or so. If you don't want to play it that way, that's cool - but as written this is how the realms work now; they are not dealing in absolutes any more when it comes to sources of divine power.

"Deities and divine casters worked one way for literal decades until WoTC..." Exactly. - they did work that way... Until WotC pitched the next realms-shaking event, shifted the way the realms worked and altered the rules. They literally upended the realms, created the second sundering, rewrote many of the rules for how the realms operated. Direct god worship used to be the only way individuals could access divine power; now it is not. That's a change that happened. The realms were one way... but now they are not that way any more, and there are other possibilities.

As I said, this is not intended to be argumentative or taken in conflict, just as conversation. I don't really think we're going to be able to get to a place we agree upon - I can't convey to you why having those other possibilities, and allowing others to have those possibilities, matters, if they don't matter to you, but if that's where we are, that's okay.