AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

The deity system needs a list of nature deities.
it's really a pain to find which is nature and which is not as you need to inspect all of them through.

Do you want to know which deities have the plant domain, or which deities are acceptable for Druids to take? Because they are not necessarily the same.

A list of deities with the plant domain.

And, quoted from here:

Quote:

Many [Druid] societies are religious in nature and tied to a church of some sort, but not all are.[3] In particular, druids find themselves drawn to the worship of the gods Angharradh, Chauntea, Mielikki, Auril, Silvanus, Sseth, Talos, or Umberlee, or the gods Isis or Osiris before their disappearance during the Spellplague. The primordial Aerdrie Faenya as well as the exarchs Baervan Wildwanderer, Cyrrollalee, Gwaeron Windstrom, Shiallia, and Thard Harr are also common subjects of veneration, as were Anhur, Eldath, Lurue, Nobanion, Rillifane Rallathil, Sebek, Segojan Earthcaller, Ubtao, and Ulutiu and before the Spellplague.

I should also note that evil Druids can also worship Talona, which for some reason is not noted on this list, but is noted by her list of usual worshippers.

elemental deitys could also fit the bill, though if you want nature easy, stick by animal and plant domains, and use the wiki to see in more detail, to make sure you don't pick an orcish nature deity, or something rather random like that.

Deities that can support druids are related to feykind. I'm fuzzy on the details, but basically, the ones on the list are the only ones who a druid would get spells from after taking an oath to that god's version of balance or what have you. The elemental gods have nothing to do with feykind and cycles in and of themselves, at least not individually; they just each stand for their own element.

Here's an almost complete list for you:

Quote:

Faerun Pantheon: Silvanus, Mielikki, Eldath, Nobanion, Gwaeron Windstrom, Shiallia, Lurue, Chauntea, Grumbar, Istishia, Akadi, Kossuth, Ulutiu, Talos, Malar, Umberlee, Auril, Talona.

Mulhorandi Pantheon: Osiris, Anhur, Isis, Sebek.

Elven Pantheon: Rillifane Rallathil, Angharradh, Aerdrie Faenya, Deep Sashelas, Fenmarel Mestarine, Solonor Thelandira, Khalreshaar.

Gnome Pantheon: Baervan Wildwanderer, Segojan Earthcaller.

Hin Pantheon: Sheela Peryroyl.

Dwarf Pantheon: Thard Harr.

Almost complete, because there are "nature" gods who don't support Druids. This is just a list of gods who do.

wait, there are deitys that don't support druids?? god...I need to re-write my request...I thought it was mainly a cleric thing.

ed: sorry, ignore that, waking up slow today, didn't realise akadi was already listed.

Glyph wrote:

wait, there are deitys that don't support druids?? god...I need to re-write my request...I thought it was mainly a cleric thing.

Of course. Only nature deities -- some nature deities at that -- support Druids. The Druid class is a specialty class, so there's more involved in taking it than there is in being a Cleric. Think of it like Paladin's. Only certain gods support Paladins.

What nature dieties don't support Druids, Gunz? I thought they all did.

What about Ghaunadaur? He supports the animal domain on amia but would druids access spells from him?

-Cloak-and-Dagger- wrote:

What nature dieties don't support Druids, Gunz? I thought they all did.

To name a few:
Urogalan, Hin god of Earth; Geb, Mulhorandi god of Earth; Set, Mulhorandi god of Desert, Drought, Rot, Snakes and Poison; Marthammior Duin, Dwarven god of Lightning and Travel;

And actually, I listed Umberlee in the list before, but she doesn't support Druids in FR lore. She's goddess of Oceans, Currents, Waves and Sea Winds.

Also, in FR lore, Grumbar, Istishia and Akadi don't support Druids. Only Kossuth, of all the Primordial Lords, supports Druids.

Ghaunadaur is more of a beast lord, but read his lore and then read Malars. Tell me they're not highly similar in thought.

And if you really want to go a little further, I believe Lathander to be a nature god. Look at his portfolio: Spring, Birth, Renewal, Youth, Vitality. Read his dogma too. Very nature loving and even encourages his people to plant things.

Having an elemental domain doesn't mean the god is related to the natural aspect of it, necessarily. Coincidentally it was when I tried to make a druid of Urogalan that I found all this out myself.

Though now I'm curious how the elemental deities fit in this; a druid doesn't follow a god's dogma as such but rather uses the dogma as the method by which balance is achieved (very generalized statement) - so, for Kossuth, a druid would believe that balance is achieved when everything is ashes? Still, I could have sworn the elemental gods weren't actually on the list, back when I checked.

Zinovy wrote:

Having an elemental domain doesn't mean the god is related to the natural aspect of it, necessarily. Coincidentally it was when I tried to make a druid of Urogalan that I found all this out myself.

Sure it does? How do you figure that being a deity of air, water, fire and earth -- or just one of the four -- isn't a force of nature? Elemental air, water, fire and earth are just like their Torilian counterparts, only more pure, because they're practically segregated from all else. Druids like summoning Elementals because they represent aspects of nature. If they were false or corrupt representation of nature, most of the gods wouldn't allow the Druids to summon them, I'm sure. Most of them hate outsiders, after all.

Urogalan relates to his aspect of Death more than his aspect of Earth. But he still relates to it. He maintains loose relations with the goodly gods of Earth and hates the evil gods of Earth, counting them among his worst enemies.

Look at someone like Anhur. He's way more focused on war, battle and strength than he is his nature aspects of thunder and rain and he supports Druids. Hell, read his dogma, there's nothing about nature really in there. Lathander says more things in his dogma about nature than Anhur does. Yet still, Anhur supports Druids.

It really is a matter of the people who write the lore just picking and choosing as they please really. There's no real reason why Urogalan, Umberlee and the like shouldn't support Druids.

Zinovy wrote:

Though now I'm curious how the elemental deities fit in this; a druid doesn't follow a god's dogma as such but rather uses the dogma as the method by which balance is achieved (very generalized statement) - so, for Kossuth, a druid would believe that balance is achieved when everything is ashes? Still, I could have sworn the elemental gods weren't actually on the list, back when I checked.

That might be one way to look at it, but it certainly isn't the only way. Druid follow their god's dogma like a Cleric would, imo. Kossuthians doesn't have to be about burning everything all the time, btw. The flame of fire can mean a lot of things, depending on how you interpret it. Some see it as purifying, in a redeeming way. Some see it as a force of pure destruction. Some see it as a needed force of renewal through a balance of both destruction and redeeming purity. Hence why you see Good, Neutral and Evil orders of Kossuthians.

The Primordials, as I said, don't support Druids, except for Kossuth. He's the only one who does in FR lore. However, here on Amia, they all support Druids.

Gond has Fire domain. I'm just saying, a domain isn't what makes it a nature deity. Taking Urogalan as an example again, since he's less extremely separated from nature than Gond is, I see it more as though he has Earth domain because it fits into his dogma's practice - however the crux of the dogma isn't about nature, nor even about cycles (rather about ending). Nor does having a relationship to other earthy gods make him more of a nature deity: his portfolio is his portfolio.

According to what source do the elemental deities support druids? I just checked mine and they are absent, like the one He, yes he posted. My question on Kossuth was rhetorical, mostly; elements are one of the things that compose the cycle, and therefore not an end to achieve balance in and of themselves. You seem to have answered under the assumption that druids follow the god to the same end and in the same manner as monks and clerics and leymen, which is one of the things I don't agree on.

But I haven't managed to find where the one who first told me of the nature gods being related to fey got his information. Does anyone know?

yeah the question was about druid supportive deities, thanks for all your replies.

Quote:

Also, in FR lore, Grumbar, Istishia and Akadi don't support Druids.

>_< fuuuuuu-

I wish I had FR related source books. is this in the wiki? and does that mean no akadi druids on amia?

As stated; On Amia, the primeordials support druids.

The Elemental Lords support Druids here, yes.

*casts Raise Thread*

What about Oberon? Might he have been left out of the discussion above because he's not (to my knowledge) traditionally a FR god, and he just got forgotten? He grants the animal domain, and he's a god of the fey, a people traditionally and strongly associated with nature. The location of his shrine on Amia suggests that he's intended to be seen here as very nature-y.

I've been pondering trying my hand at playing a druid, and I'm looking for something that manages to be a little bit atypical while remaining lore-accurate. What do y'all think?

the Idol of Oberon wrote:

Dogma of Oberon: Oberon is stern and strong, but happier out hunting than dealing with the politics of the Seelie Court. He's aware that his intelligence and wisdom, though high, seem low compared to his wife's attributes. He is a protector-god, using physical combat more than illusion and camouflage as most sylvan deities do.

The lists above are partial. There are sooooo many race gods that I don't even know about that would support Druids. Some that I've learned about since those last posts too.

A great deal of the Sylvan gods support Druids and Oberon is definitely one of them -- Titania too, for the record. So make your Oberon worship Druid and enjoy!

There's very little information out there about Oberon though, unfortunately. I planned to make a page for him on the Amia wiki with the book I have that has info on him. I'll give you his portfolio here though, so you get a better idea of what he looks after: Nature, Wild Places and Animals. He's known as "The Lord of Beasts" in the Seelie Court and sometimes referred to as "King Oberon" by Sylvan folk.

I'm not a fan of lists because the two lists I know of in source material are in conflict with eachother, and inconsistent with individual deity lore or NPCs. Besides, I'm of the opinion that pretty much any god could theoretically support druids with good reason (and the further from the god's portfolio the granted powers are, the better the reason needed) so there should always the possibility of making a reasonable case. The idea that a god was outright incapable of granting a handful of insignifigant spells seems awkward, and inconsistent if you look at all the other uncharacteristic stuff they can give to their followers.

As GuNz said, the lists aren't exhaustive. But I'd also say that those gods who aren't said to have druids (Akadi, Set etc.) might have druids that just haven't been documented. Take the Elemental Lords for example: Faiths & Avatars says nothing about Elemental Lords' druids, but mentions shamans as their worshipers especially in primitive cultures. In Faiths & Pantheons there's no mention of either shamans (due to no such class existing in 3e) or primitive cultures (because the entries are signifigantly shorter). But there are druids in Kossuth's worshiper list, with no explanation in the actual text. Now, it's reasonable to assume this is either a simple translation of shaman into druid or a concession to some canon storyline or NPC we don't know about. Either way, it demonstrates there is no reason not to assume the same is possible for the other Elemental Lords. This argument gets even more weight when you realize that Kossuth is featured in a different chapter of the book, under Greater Gods whose entries are much more extensive and . Kossuth's church is much larger than any of the other Elemental Lords' so if they're all unlikely but possible candidates for druid patrons, it stands to reason that the largest church would support such a marginal group whereas the small churches simply might not have had the chance to develop such a branch right now.

I'm preaching to the choir because Elemental Lords are valid druid patrons in Amia, but they're just such a good example of how to make us of source material and how not to.

...Aha! It seems my argumentation was unnecessary. I just looked up the revised Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting (2e, that is) and on page 17 of A Grand Tour Of The Realms it is said:

Quote:

Druids of the same circle may worship different deities, though in general, druids of the same circle tend to worship the same god. Common powers venerated by druids are Eldath, Silvanus, Chauntea (in places), and the elemental lords, in particular Grumbar and Kossuth (earth and flame, respectively).

So it seems later material just forgot about this. Stuff like this makes me very skeptical of any final lists and definite statements.

Edit: And actually, F&A says in the special Druid section (page 184) that the Elemental Lords are rumored to be worshiped by druids but not as patron deities. Moreover, the "Complete Nature Deity List" in F&P is different from 3e FRCS. The latter includes Set, for example, the former doesn't.

So we have the 2e FRCS, 3e FRCS, F&A and F&P all giving different information. That should show the need for extreme skepticism when reading any and all source material.

As for Oberon, I don't see why a non-fey would worship him let alone become a druid for him. I think his druids would be pretty situational: if you happen to be a sylvan creature under his rule and patronage and want to become a druid, you can get your powers from him. But I bet there are also other fey "gods" who're closer to nature stuff and would be more likely candidates if you just had to pick one from a clean slate. To choose Oberon, you'd probably have some strong historical connections to his worship and have a special interest in his dogma in addition to normal nature stuff.

But yeah, he might very well be a valid druid patron. I wouldn't pick him just to be a little different, because that seems like a gimmick (unless you're requesting a faerie character), but it's your call. There are great and interesting combinations you could do with the human gods, cultures, attitude to tradition and circle, druidic prestige classes (Forest Master, Elemental Archon, the stuff in Masters Of The Wild) and so on. Choosing a god is only a small step in defining your version of druidism, IMO.

IronAngel wrote:

As for Oberon, I don't see why a non-fey would worship him let alone become a druid for him. ... I wouldn't pick him just to be a little different... Choosing a god is only a small step in defining your version of druidism, IMO.

Completely agree with all of this. The character I was pondering, I'd planned for her to be a feytouched before I'd thought to make an Oberon follower (or even before I'd thought to make her a druid, actually).

Gunz - what book are you getting that Oberon info from?

And, Iron and Gunz, I agree that there's some heavy downside to an attempt to compile a definitive list of druid-supporting gods. I wasn't looking for a full list, just some discussion, so thanks to you both for your thoughts.

In matters like this, I'm a big fan of fitting in smoothly with the setting's established lore... my caution in this regard is shaped largely by a discussion I overheard early in my Amia playing days, in which a player had been playing a paladin of... well, I forget which god, exactly, but the player ended up getting told pretty definitively that the god he'd chosen doesn't support paladins.

The book is called Monsters Mythology. It has a whole section on the Sylvan deities. It's not all that informative though, to be honest. It's pretty short.

IronAngel wrote:

...But I'd also say that those gods who aren't said to have druids (Akadi, Set etc.) might have druids that just haven't been documented...

...Moreover, the "Complete Nature Deity List" in F&P is different from 3e FRCS. The latter includes Set, for example, the former doesn't...

Aye, I was going to say, Set's entry in Faith and Pantheons actually -does- make mention of Druids. I hadn't seen it before until a few months ago. That made me a happy guy, because I've always thought Set was by far the most interesting evil nature god and I found it a total shame that they made no mention of Druids for him. Set is like a mesh of a little bit of Silvanus, Talona, Malar, Talos, Bane, Shar and Cyric all in one. He's the coolest evil nature god by default!

If I didn't have Willow, I might consider making a Druid of Set, Talona or Malar. But probably Set. He's just so damn awesome.

I'll have to disagree with that for simle reason. Set is not some much a god of natural death but of the dark necromancey form. The fact that he has followers who go around defiling graves and such. e also has a good number of Necromancer followers of the undead makeing sort.

That only goes to show that druids operate in much more diverse environments than you originally thought, not that they don't operate in Set's church. We have clear evidence of druids in the churches of Set and Malar (whose dogma says the Balance is weak BS and druids should be killed), so if it's incompatible with our idea of druids (which it isn't necessarily) then it's that idea that needs to yield, not the fact that those druids exist.

Demented Doctor wrote:

I'll have to disagree with that for simle reason. Set is not some much a god of natural death but of the dark necromancey form. The fact that he has followers who go around defiling graves and such. e also has a good number of Necromancer followers of the undead makeing sort.

Why are you talking about him as a god of death? He's actually not. Defiling graves isn't something forbidden to Druids either. And sure, he has undead making necromancers, but so what? Lots of gods probably do because being a necromancer is an arcane thing and requires no approval form the god you claim to worship.

However, he does have Clerics who summon undead and that's where you should be arguing from. But in his defense, Talos, Talona, Malar, Auril and Umberlee all have undead raising divines casting priests. So.... why are we singling Set out here?...

Set isn't a nature god because he's a god of death, he's not a god of death at all -- although he is a god of murder -- he's a god of nature because he's a god of the desert, drought, rot, snakes and poison. Those are all very much so parts of nature. He's as legit a god of nature as the rest of the evil gods of nature.

www.realmshelp.com

We should organize a list of deities that support paladins while we're at this druid-deity list.

Paladin and Druid are the only classes we have that are restricted by religion. Those restrictions should be public knowledge, if we expect people to hold to them.

o0GuNz_N_RoSeZ0o wrote:

Demented Doctor wrote:

I'll have to disagree with that for simle reason. Set is not some much a god of natural death but of the dark necromancey form. The fact that he has followers who go around defiling graves and such. e also has a good number of Necromancer followers of the undead makeing sort.

Why are you talking about him as a god of death? He's actually not. Defiling graves isn't something forbidden to Druids either. And sure, he has undead making necromancers, but so what? Lots of gods probably do because being a necromancer is an arcane thing and requires no approval form the god you claim to worship.

However, he does have Clerics who summon undead and that's where you should be arguing from. But in his defense, Talos, Talona, Malar, Auril and Umberlee all have undead raising divines casting priests. So.... why are we singling Set out here?...

Set isn't a nature god because he's a god of death, he's not a god of death at all -- although he is a god of murder -- he's a god of nature because he's a god of the desert, drought, rot, snakes and poison. Those are all very much so parts of nature. He's as legit a god of nature as the rest of the evil gods of nature.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the matter of Set.

Quote:

Talos, Talona, Malar, Auril and Umberlee all have undead raising divines casting priests.

though I would ask for explanion on that part. How would nature dieties not revoke power from their divine followers for creating undead? Sepcialy sense none of them have necromancey or death in their porfolio.

Nature deities evidently don't care about undead categorically (though some do). It's druids and their odd antiquated oaths, and I bet the gods are laughing their asses off at their silly worshipers.

But you're just looking at this the wrong way. The undeniable fact is that those gods support necromancy and druids. This is not up to debate, because it's clearly stated in the books. We can debate the explanation and the conclusions we should make from that, of course. I have my own ideas but I don't want to go there because it's controversial.

As for paladin deities, Amia has never enforced any strict set of gods. We've had paladins of Corellon, Eilistraee, Oghma etc. Maybe they're not paladins IC, but holy knights with similar doctrines and oaths. I kind of agree with this, even though I've spoken out against paladins of Corellon (and elven paladins in general). But FR material has shown that there can be new exceptions to the rule because since Sune, also at least Selûne has been added to the list of viable paladin patrons outside the LG-NG-LN spectrum. I'm of the opinion many CG and TN gods could have paladins, if their church and faith has a fitting niche that could be interpreted through a paladin dogma.

not to mention rangers of non-nature gods still casting spells wich is speficially mentioned in the forgotten realm campaign setting as a no no

Rangers do not need a nature god on Amia, and the specific (Amia) overrules the general (Forgotten Realms).

In addition to what Tormak said, that's not even true anyway. The FRCS does not say rangers need a patron deity of nature to get spells. It says they need to pick some patron deity at 4th level if they want spells, and that their preferences are often similar to the druids' but they may choose differently if they have odd interests. It's Faiths & Pantheons that says both Druids and Rangers must choose a patron from the list that follows, but that is simply a mistake and not consistent with any other Ranger lore in FR. The list itself is also erroneous as I've pointed out earlier in this topic, and that book is riddled with mistakes in general.

IronAngel wrote:

Nature deities evidently don't care about undead categorically (though some do). It's druids and their odd antiquated oaths, and I bet the gods are laughing their asses off at their silly worshipers.

Correction, good sir, -evil- nature -gods- evidently don't care about undead categorically. All the good and neutral gods do care and they view it negatively.

Before someone mentions the primordial lords, they're not gods and they're a different story.

Well, that falls under what I said. All nature gods evidently don't care, even if all good nature gods might. (By categorically I meant "all" or "without exception" though it was a poor choice of words.) I'd have to check every god individually, but you're probably right.

What are the Primordial Lords? Is that another name of the Elemental Lords? In our edition, they're still gods. The not a god thing is from 4e (though their different role has been emphasized from the beginning). But they're not good anyway, so it doesn't matter.

I think alignment is a more important factor than the gods' relationship to nature, here. Good gods in general don't like undead because they're evil, and evil gods in general don't mind them for the same reason. Some gods of nature have a special distaste for them as an affront to the Balance and cycle of life, but that doesn't seem to go with being a nature god automatically.

The Primordial Lords are analogous to the Greek Titans. They are the "Elder Gods". They arose out of the primordial chaos just like Shar and Selune, and in time came to encompass their own morals and ideals that are associated with each element.

The only real differences I think between the other deities and them is that they aren't worship dependent(I don't believe they were thrown down in the ToT). There's nothing truly special about them other than that.

But who are they, and what source are you basing this on? Not that it's very relevant to the question of undead and nature deities, but I'm curious anyway.

I want to say it was from Manual of the Planes or something, but it's been a while.

The ToT guess is my own idea. Who are they is simple. Kossuth is Fire. Istishia is Water. They are the original sentient gene-seed of their elements. The first fires ever to exist in Realmspace formed Kossuth. The first winds to blow eventually manifested themselves as Akadi. Them "arising from the first elemental forces" is pretty commonly accepted, but I can't remember where it is first said. But again, I imagine Manual of the Planes, I'll look it up later.

My basis for saying that they are not worship-dependent is simple. Firstly, what are the implications of "earth" or "fire" or "water" dying? How would that even come about? What would it entail? If worship means to be thought of, all three elements are "worshiped" merely by the fact that they are used. The elemental lords and their ideas follow their elements, not the other way around. Kossuth says burn, consume, purge, purify. Istishia says flow, wear down, replenish, etc. They are similar to how the Lords of Hell work, in that they are worshiped as their ethos is indulged, which happens independently, or at least autonomously, of them themselves. In other words, I submit that they are worshiped because they exist, as opposed to existing to be worshiped, like the other deities.

My second basis, which is probably just a derivation of the first, is that they represent a significantly less abstract forces, to the point of being like their name, elemental. Say, Tyr promotes "Justice." Justice is a concept which must be understood for it be worshiped. The same for Bane and his Tyranny, or Silvanus and his Balance of Nature. All of these concepts are based off of numerous other points and concepts that compound to be a dynamic aggregate.

But what is the concept of "fire"? It is simply what it is. It is elemental. It consumes not because of some moral standard, but simply by the fact that it is. The same thing for water flowing or earth remaining unchanged. There is no higher concept. While a few mortals might create their own set or morals to mimic the nature of each element and the sentient representations of each, ultimately they are what they are and nothing more.

Sorry if that rambled, writing between classes. Will try to find MotP later.

IronAngel wrote:

What are the Primordial Lords? Is that another name of the Elemental Lords? In our edition, they're still gods. The not a god thing is from 4e (though their different role has been emphasized from the beginning). But they're not good anyway, so it doesn't matter.

Primordial elements are what are thought to be the elements that existed before the world was created. The ingredients of the world that was to be, if you will. Hence, water, air, earth and fire are the base ingredients, the primordial elements, the makeup of primordial energy as a whole. Therefore, Primordial Lords. ::shrugs:: It's what my Druid calls them and I've kind of adopted it myself OOCly.

I forget where I read they're not gods, but are deities, a bit like powerful demons and devils can be deities, I'll have to look for it. You'll find a very very careful lack the Elemental Lords being called god in Faiths and Avatars, while the other gods are constantly called gods. Arkadi is the only exception, where they call her a god once. Perhaps a mistake, perhaps not.

Another thing that shows that they're not gods is that the Elemental Lords are known to have very few followers to the point where their followers are sometimes called "cultists." How can they have so few followers, yet remain Greater Powers? For gods, they depend on their worship for their power level.

The Elemental Lords are also know for being very uncaring to their mortal followers and often ignore them, in fact. Ao doesn't allow gods to ignore their mortal followers, if I'm not mistaken.

The only exception to the lack of worship is Kossuth, of course. He's still very uncaring about his followers though, just not as bad as the rest.

Yeah, they're different no doubt. They depend on worship much less than the average god. That's not quite unique, because worship is just one factor of a god's importance, power and life force. Some gods have more permanency than others by virtue of being tied to non-cultural things. The Elemental Lords just happen to be at one end of a seamless spectrum. Different sources may have said different things, but I think it's probably going too far to seperate them as entities of a distinct class of their own, OOC. Not sure, just a curiosity anyway.

You're reading a little much into the lore though, Dark Immolation. It looks good and reasonable from a speculative perspective and something you could very well believe IC, but F&A/F&P don't give that much information. I doubt it was Manual Of The Planes because that's a core book and the four are FR deities. As I said, though, it looks pretty reasonable as IC theology and mythology.

"Primordial" is a silly 4e term for the Elemental Gods.

Nature deities

Who is online