They have removed the lock. If you are waiting for them to errata the PHP for you regarding it, that's a bit silly IMO. They have released official books in which clerics can worship things other than deities. When a first source is conflicted by a second, that's an exception. The game is full of things that are presented in this way. It's like your character's base movement being augmented by a spell or feature.
They have removed the lock. If you are waiting for them to errata the PHP for you regarding it, that's a bit silly IMO. They have released official books in which clerics can worship things other than deities. When a first source is conflicted by a second, that's an exception. The game is full of things that are presented in this way. It's like your character's base movement being augmented by a spell or feature.
You're getting confused One thing is that in a specific setting the need to pray to a god is removed, for convenience, otherwise you could not play a cleric, and replace it with something else. That happens in Eberron, and also in the old Dark Sun setting. But that's for that particular setting. Can you play a cleric without needing a god? The short answer is no. The long answer is: As a general rule, no, unless it's possible in your setting (either homebrew, or a specific setting like Eberron). But with the rules in hand you can't say yes. That is false. The rulebook forces you to choose a god, and then there's a specific setting that has a particular rule that substitutes gods for faith. But that's in Eberron or your possible homebrew setting.
This is like if Dark Sun comes out tomorrow, where wizards destroy life by doing their magic (the defilers), and you come to tell me that in D&D, in general, wizards destroy life by doing magic. That's in the Dark Sun setting, not a general rule.
Several posters are quite correct is the statement that clerics do not, in fact, need to choose a god to worship.
DMG. Ch. 1 - Gods of Your World. <snip> As far as the game’s rules are concerned, it doesn’t matter if your world has hundreds of deities or a church devoted to a single god. In rules terms, clerics choose domains, not deities, so your world can associate domains with deities in any way you choose.
DMG. Ch. 1 - Other Religious Systems. In your campaign, you can create pantheons of gods who are closely linked in a single religion, monotheistic religions (worship of a single deity), dualistic systems (centered on two opposing deities or forces), mystery cults (involving personal devotion to a single deity, usually as part of a pantheon system), animistic religions (revering the spirits inherent in nature), or even forces and philosophies that don’t center on deities.
A deity isn't a requirement for your cleric to chose a domain. The domain can be supported by several deities all at the same time. They aren't required to be devoted to just one, or one at all. They can be devoted to all of the deities of a pantheon that support that domain. They can be devoted to the concept and philosophy of the domain, regardless of the deity that supports it. Your cleric can abosolutly choose a deity to emulate, or to pattern their beliefs after, but is not a requirement for the mechanical benifit of the domain choice.
Edit: If a cleric were to pick Lathander as their deity, would that grant them access to two domains, or would they only be considerd to worship half of the religious dogma of the church?
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
I'm not confused at all. In Eberron, Wildemount, Ravenloft there are things spelled out for you that you can worship as a cleric that are not true deities. In short, Clerics get their power from faith, not the deity. There is no sidebar or exact sentence that says "In this setting, clerics don't need a deity" in these books. It's all in the lore text, not mechanics text. The same is true in FR where there are examples of clerics getting powers through the worship of dead deities or non-deity subjects of worship. There are things to back this concept of faith over deity up in every official setting really. I'm not saying that this is something you should do without talking to your DM, and mostly this thread is only important in regards to discouraging people from telling others that they are playing wrong because clerics must have deities, but I'd argue as well that it's not really all that setting specific as a concept. Either way, it's not that important. What's important to me is that these purists realize they are mistaken in their beliefs that Clerics must always in every instance worship a Deity or they are not a Cleric and not playing Clerics correctly. The can play how they wish, but they are actually the ones homebrewing by enforcing this sort of imposition on people. It's the same vibe shared by the sorts of people that still insist the same thing about Paladins.
Reading all the comments I think we are not understanding each other, or that things are getting confused.
First, the cleric class needs to choose a god. That is the general rule.However, as in everything, there may be exceptions. Some settings include those exceptions. Okay, but that doesn't override the general rule. It is an exception.
What happens when one does not understand that Eberron, since it has been mentioned, is an exception? That the class loses all the narrative sense. It's not because I'm a purist, it's because that rule is there, and there's a good reason for it. Someone said above that Wizard is going to remove that rule. I don't know, but I'd bet you don't. The rule is there precisely to prevent the class from blurring thematically, and for both the player and the DM to understand how a cleric should behave thematically. Something similar happens with the paladin's oaths, and the box that warns you what can happen if a paladin does not follow his oaths. These kinds of things are not secondary, or to give color. They are essential for the specific gaming experience that the designer proposes to you. Can you do what you want? You can, of course. It's your game. But the game has a design. In this case, the design tells you that Clerics have to choose a god. Then there are specific settings that, for whatever reason, give you other options.
And also, in your setting hombrew, you can do it the way you want. Just like in your setting warlocks might not have a patron and get their powers some other way. But that's in your setting hombrew, not the general rule. I don't think anyone will go to the homebrew subforum and say that clerics need to have a god. It's your setting, do what you want.
To double check if it is a rule that there is a requirement or not, simply ask yourself: Is there a written consequence for not doing it?
Whether or not someone worships a god is a choice they make every day with their actions and deeds, and if they stop doing it, what happens? There isn't an answer to this in 5e, because there isn't a strict requirement that the cleric worship anything whatsoever, let alone have a god. The requirement, is that they have a domain. And there is no behaviors directly required to maintain this class feature, let alone maintain the class.
Everyone is perfectly free to homebrew their own de-leveling system for various classes for various reasons. If you wanna create your own system for how a cleric un-clerics themselves if they don't worship their god hard enough or whatever, that's certainly a thing you could do. But it isn't how the default game expects things to work.
You gain xp, you pick levels, that's that. Your morality, worship, social graces, demeanor, etc have no direct bearing on any of this. You can be a 3ft tall halfling with a 20 strength score, The system for character creation allows for silly results, but it is the system the game uses. Nothing prevents you from creating a completely atheistic cleric of any domain. Is that silly? Might be, depends on the story you and your group are telling.
Well, this thing about the consequences is interesting. What the rules really tell you is that the first thing you have to do is choose a deity. So if you don't choose her, the consequence is that you can't become a cleric. And beware that, according to the rules, the deity goes before the domain. You choose a deity, and at 2nd level, you choose a domain related to your deity. The deity is the foundation stone of the class.
What consequence is there if you do not pray to your god or follow his designs? The manual does not specify it. So it's up to the DM. Logic says there has to be some consequence, just as logic says if you spit in a king's face there has to be consequences. But it depends on the DM and the story. I would leave him without the benefits of the class, but that's homebrew since it's not in the rulebook. And it really doesn't have to be. Every DM will know how to deal with that.
To double check if it is a rule that there is a requirement or not, simply ask yourself: Is there a written consequence for not doing it?
Whether or not someone worships a god is a choice they make every day with their actions and deeds, and if they stop doing it, what happens? There isn't an answer to this in 5e, because there isn't a strict requirement that the cleric worship anything whatsoever, let alone have a god. The requirement, is that they have a domain. And there is no behaviors directly required to maintain this class feature, let alone maintain the class.
Everyone is perfectly free to homebrew their own de-leveling system for various classes for various reasons. If you wanna create your own system for how a cleric un-clerics themselves if they don't worship their god hard enough or whatever, that's certainly a thing you could do. But it isn't how the default game expects things to work.
You gain xp, you pick levels, that's that. Your morality, worship, social graces, demeanor, etc have no direct bearing on any of this. You can be a 3ft tall halfling with a 20 strength score, The system for character creation allows for silly results, but it is the system the game uses. Nothing prevents you from creating a completely atheistic cleric of any domain. Is that silly? Might be, depends on the story you and your group are telling.
What is the written consequence for firing 4 missiles from a magic missile spell at 1st level instead of just 3? I have not read any consequence whatsoever to attempting such an action, not even any formally written rule saying outright that it fails.
Nothing in the rules actually prohibits playing a non-sentient rock, as long as the DM ok's it. Does that make playing a non-sentient rock 'RAW?' The DM might actually not even hold you to the non-sentient part, nor to the fact rocks cannot normally move on their own, even though you describe your character as a non-sentient rock.
But none of that makes it RAW to play such a character, nor RAW to fire that 4 missile level 1 Magic Missile spell, or to play a cleric without a deity. Lack of stated penalty is not a decider of RAW.
When the rules override your ability to choose your character's actions, such as whether to worship something or not, they'll be very explicit. You always control your character's choices. Being forced into worshipping a god isn't free will, I'm not even 100% sure most any compulsion effects could accomplish that.
Also, there isn't a non-sentient rock race option. Not sure where you're getting that from, but sounds 3rd party.
Well, this thing about the consequences is interesting. What the rules really tell you is that the first thing you have to do is choose a deity. So if you don't choose her, the consequence is that you can't become a cleric. And beware that, according to the rules, the deity goes before the domain. You choose a deity, and at 2nd level, you choose a domain related to your deity. The deity is the foundation stone of the class.
What consequence is there if you do not pray to your god or follow his designs? The manual does not specify it. So it's up to the DM. Logic says there has to be some consequence, just as logic says if you spit in a king's face there has to be consequences. But it depends on the DM and the story. I would leave him without the benefits of the class, but that's homebrew since it's not in the rulebook. And it really doesn't have to be. Every DM will know how to deal with that.
The first thing you have to do is choose a god? I'm not convinced the rules say any such thing. They talk about choosing one, yes. But, I've never seen it phrased as a requirement.
"Worshipping", as the topic question asks about, is an action, anyway, and nothing in the rules compel you to perform this action. You can be as dutiful or as irreverent as you please. You can curse the gods very names. Nothing about these choices, RAW, impact your being or not being a cleric.
Based on that logic, clerics do not need to worship at all. They would not even have to care about their chosen domain at all. Again, any class can be reduced to pure mechanics, pure numbers. However past a certain point, are you still playing a character?
Just as there is no rule explicitly prohibiting a cleric that does not worship at all, there is no rule that explicitly prohibits non-sentient rock races. The section on race says the following:
Every character belongs to a race, one of the many intelligent humanoid species in the D&D world. The most common player character races are dwarves, elves, halflings, and humans. Some races also have subraces, such as mountain dwarf or wood elf, as well as the less widespread races of dragonborn, gnomes, half-elves, half-orcs, and tieflings. Chapter 2 provides more information about these races.
Note that it lists common races and then less widespread races and refers to the list of race descriptions regarding those being 'more information about (those) races.' It does not actually say that no other races exist. There is no stated penalty for playing some other race, just as there is, as you have pointed out, no stated penalty for not following a deity.
Not sure what you are talking about regarding free will. Presumably the character chose their faith just as they chose becoming a cleric. On a player/meta level, the player still decides who their character worships.
There is no non-sentient rock race option. IDK why you keep bringing it up. You can check the DNDbeyond database and you'll find there isn't one in any 5e supplement in existence. You can homebrew it, sure.
Try it out in a practical sense: Here in DnDBeyond, try to build the character. You can create a cleric without choosing a god. You cannot create a non-sentient rock unless you enable homebrew.
We are diverting this to absurdity. The class rules tell you that you have to choose a deity. It is the first thing he says in the section Creating a Cleric. I copy below, although it has already been copied many times:
"As you create a cleric, the most important question to consider is which deity to serve and what principles you want your character to embody. The Gods of the Multiverse section includes lists of many of the gods of the multiverse. Check with your DM to learn which deities are in your campaign.
Once you've chosen a deity, consider your cleric's relationship to that god. Did you enter this service willingly? Or did the god choose you, impelling you into service with no regard for your wishes? How do the temple priests of your faith regard you: as a champion or a troublemaker? What are your ultimate goals? Does your deity have a special task in mind for you? Or are you striving to prove yourself worthy of a great quest?"
This entire paragraph refers to that deity. It is obvious that the class is designed thinking that the first thing the player is going to do is choose a deity.
Later, when he talks about your spells, he says the following: Spellcasting Ability Wisdom is your spellcasting ability for your cleric spells. The power of your spells comes from your devotion to your deity.
If you have no devotion to your deity, it cannot fuel your spells. It is something implicit.
Then you have to choose your domain depending on the deity you have chosen (not at level 2 as someone said. Your domain is at level 1): Choose one domain related to your deity: Knowledge, Life, Light, Nature, Tempest, Trickery, or War. The Life domain is detailed at the end of the class description and provides examples of gods associated with it.
In channel divinity it also tells you that it is the energy of your deity that you channel. Again, if you don't have a deity, you can't channel energy from it. It is something that is implicit: At 2nd level, you gain the ability to channel divine energy directly from your deity, using that energy to fuel magical effects
At 10th level, you gain the ability to pray to your god, and ask for his intervention: Divine Intervention Beginning at 10th level, you can call on your deity to intervene on your behalf when your need is great.
Again, the core element of this class ability is your deity. If you don't have deity, you can't do this. You are missing the key element for it.
In no case can it be said that the rules do not force you to choose a deity. They do. It is written in the rules, throughout the class, and insistently. There is nothing in this class as important as that choice.
Now, having said that, it is also true that there are some specific settings that allow you other options that replace your deity. This is clearly done for convenience. There are no deities in those settings, for whatever reason, and it wouldn't be a good design decision to forbid you from using a cleric. So alternatives are sought as a substitute, which is fine. But that does not mean that you no longer have to choose a deity to be cleric.. You must, but there are a number of settings that give you other options.
In summary. Do you have to choose a deity when you become a cleric? Yes, it is in the rules and it is mandatory. It's the pillar of your class. However, those who argue that there are settings in which you choose it is not a deity, but something else that replaces them, are also right. Regarding those settings, those people are right. But not as a general rule. At least until a general rulebook comes out that changes the core of the class, which hasn't happened.
Based on that logic, clerics do not need to worship at all. They would not even have to care about their chosen domain at all. Again, any class can be reduced to pure mechanics, pure numbers. However past a certain point, are you still playing a character?
Just as there is no rule explicitly prohibiting a cleric that does not worship at all, there is no rule that explicitly prohibits non-sentient rock races. The section on race says the following:
Every character belongs to a race, one of the many intelligent humanoid species in the D&D world. The most common player character races are dwarves, elves, halflings, and humans. Some races also have subraces, such as mountain dwarf or wood elf, as well as the less widespread races of dragonborn, gnomes, half-elves, half-orcs, and tieflings. Chapter 2 provides more information about these races.
Note that it lists common races and then less widespread races and refers to the list of race descriptions regarding those being 'more information about (those) races.' It does not actually say that no other races exist. There is no stated penalty for playing some other race, just as there is, as you have pointed out, no stated penalty for not following a deity.
Not sure what you are talking about regarding free will. Presumably the character chose their faith just as they chose becoming a cleric. On a player/meta level, the player still decides who their character worships.
There is no non-sentient rock race option. IDK why you keep bringing it up. You can check the DNDbeyond database and you'll find there isn't one in any 5e supplement in existence. You can homebrew it, sure.
Try it out in a practical sense: Here in DnDBeyond, try to build the character. You can create a cleric without choosing a god. You cannot create a non-sentient rock unless you enable homebrew.
And now you are using DDB as the definition of RAW.
Naw. It is just a demonstration of what for-sure isn't a rule. That thing you kept bringing up, about playing a rock or whatever. That's not a thing.
In DDB you can build a level 20 character with every magic item in the books. Does that make that a legitimate character for a level 1 campaign? Or even, necessarily, every level 20 campaign?
Yes actually, that is a perfectly legitimate character. What items you have is between you and your DM and anything you guys decide on is perfectly within the rules.
With DDB you can forgo rolling and give a character straight 20's, or even with overrides, straight 30's. You can add an override number for hit points, and create a character with millions of hit points. DDB will simply allow you to do so. It does not police your character for legitimacy.
You are free to use whatever optional rules you and your group is using in your games for determining stats, but you'll have to select those options in dndbeyond, or overwrite them... the hint that you're deviating from normal is the part where you select the alternate option, or directly overwrite the normal value. That's you deviating from normal RAW calculations right there.
Meanwhile, there are other elements of RAW that are simply not implemented yet in DDB, Does that make them something other than RAW?
I'm not a DnDbeyond authority you'll need to ask the staff about any upcoming updates they're working on.
What you can and cannot do via DDB is an indicator of RAW but only evidence, not proof. Your DM is expected to do at least some proofing as to whether your character is valid for their world(s).
You still can't play a non-sentient rock and call that RAW. I'm not sure why you're trying to make this argument but it might not be conducive to the topic any longer to drill into any further, really. Can we agree you can't play a rock as your race, by RAW, and move on now?
Meanwhile, your character sheet doesn't require you to pick any gods whatsoever. It is super easy to do. And, while the cleric class stuff does talk about picking one, it doesn't say you need to. Strictly speaking, it isn't phrased as a requirement. You can just pick "null" for your deity and nothing breaks or goes haywire. You can pick the rivers, or mountains, or clouds, maybe you revere the very concept of your domain as if it were a deity? Why not pick one of those? If that fits your idea of the character you're trying to make there isn't anything stopping you. Well, nothing in the rulebook, anyway.
And for-sure without a shadow of a doubt, nothing is compelling your cleric to "worship" their deity, if they have one.
Let's keep things civil, on topic, and focused on rules please. Any discussions outside the scope of either this thread or the rules subforum should be taken elsewhere
Meanwhile, your character sheet doesn't require you to pick any gods whatsoever. It is super easy to do. And, while the cleric class stuff does talk about picking one, it doesn't say you need to. Strictly speaking, it isn't phrased as a requirement. You can just pick "null" for your deity and nothing breaks or goes haywire. You can pick the rivers, or mountains, or clouds, maybe you revere the very concept of your domain as if it were a deity? Why not pick one of those? If that fits your idea of the character you're trying to make there isn't anything stopping you. Well, nothing in the rulebook, anyway.
And for-sure without a shadow of a doubt, nothing is compelling your cleric to "worship" their deity, if they have one.
Let me ask you something. Does a warlock need to choose a Patron? And if the answer is yes (which is yes). Why? Where does it explicitly say that you have to choose a Patron?
It is to understand the logic that leads you to sign that your deity can be "null". I can understand you saying that it can be something else, like a concept, or a natural force, or whatever. I don't strictly share it as a general rule, but I get it. But "null"? What domain has "null"? Maybe you mean to choose the "nil/null", as a concept of eternal nothingness or timeless emptiness, or something like that. That, reluctantly, I could buy you. But you have to choose something, at least.
We are diverting this to absurdity. The class rules tell you that you have to choose a deity. It is the first thing he says in the section Creating a Cleric. I copy below, although it has already been copied many times:
<snip>
In summary. Do you have to choose a deity when you become a cleric? Yes, it is in the rules and it is mandatory. It's the pillar of your class. However, those who argue that there are settings in which you choose it is not a deity, but something else that replaces them, are also right. Regarding those settings, those people are right. But not as a general rule. At least until a general rulebook comes out that changes the core of the class, which hasn't happened.
I agree that the PHB tells the user: "the most important question to consider is which deity to serve and what principles you want your character to embody." But from a rules standpoint this is not a requirement to choose a singular deity. I might suggest that the wording of the PHB could have been chosen differently (it wasn't, I'm aware and conceede this) so as to prevent this discussion from happening. Again...
An endpoint to all of this discussion might revolve around the fact that the DM has to decide how the religious pantheons in the game work. Players might consider building a character that works with the world the DM is presenting instead of requireing the DM to build a world to suit their character choices. While the PHB does direct the user to consider how their character interacts with their deity(religion), the DMG suggests the DM be considerate of:
DMG Ch. 1 - A World of Your Own.As far as the game’s rules are concerned, it doesn’t matter if your world has hundreds of deities or a church devoted to a single god. In rules terms, clerics choose domains, not deities, so your world can associate domains with deities in any way you choose. (Emphasis mine.)
DMG Ch. 1 - Other Religious Systems. In your campaign, you can create pantheons of gods who are closely linked in a single religion, monotheistic religions (worship of a single deity), dualistic systems (centered on two opposing deities or forces), mystery cults (involving personal devotion to a single deity, usually as part of a pantheon system), animistic religions (revering the spirits inherent in nature), or even forces and philosophies that don’t center on deities. (Emphasis mine.)
DMG Ch. 1 - Forces and Philosophies.Not all divine powers need to be derived from deities. In some campaigns, believers hold enough conviction in their ideas about the universe that they gain magical power from that conviction. In other campaigns, impersonal forces of nature or magic replace the gods by granting power to mortals attuned to them. Just as druids and rangers can gain their spell ability from the force of nature rather than from a specific nature deity, some clerics devote themselves to ideals rather than to a god. Paladins might serve a philosophy of justice and chivalry rather than a specific deity. (Emphasis mine.)
I respect and understand what you are putting forth as an idea, and while the PHB directs a player to make a choice, the DMG assists the DM in making the constraints that form the borders of the world the player will be interacting with. Without the DM's input, published setting or not, the player cannot make a selection. The selection array will be absent. Additionally, if a player wants to work with the DM so as to devote their character's religious conviction to a philosophy, cause, ideal or set of dogmatic commandments, that can be accommodated for with the DM's concurrence.
This is the basis for saying that: No, by RAW, a cleric is not required to follow or declare a deity. They are required to choose a domain. (See 1st bullet point.)
And yes, the DMG even makes concessions for using published settings and how they interact with the DM. This is a general and core assumption that potentially affects every game of D&D that has a DM. This is the baseline from which those exceptional settings venture away from.
DMG - Ch. 1 A World of Your Own. Even if you use an existing setting, such as the Forgotten Realms, it becomes yours as you set your adventures there, create characters to inhabit it, and make changes to it over the course of your campaign.
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
So I think we can agree that as a general rule clerics have to choose a deity. That's the design of the class. However, in your particular setting, it doesn't have to be that way. That's a bit of a truism, by the way. In my setting I can do whatever I want. Players might not have to choose a race, because there would only be 1. Or they might all start with a feat, since they're demigods or whatever. In that case, such an argument simply serves to end almost all forum discussions. Which is right. Obviously in my game I do what I want, and that's what the DMG tells you. Don't you want gods? Do not include them in your game. Do you want to have only one religion? Nothing happens. Do you want your clerics to serve ideas? It's your world, do what you want.
But you have to understand that you are changing the game. Is there something wrong with it? No. But then you can't use that as an argument to say that a class works one way or another. In a particular way, in fact, you could make it work however you want. That's what the homebrew subforum is for, I understand.
I have changed my mind. In the PHB it clearly tells you that you have to choose a deity, but in the DMG it makes it clear that you don't. Thus, to the question "Does a cleric have to worship a god?" The answer is "not necessarily".
Still, I think you should. But RAW you can perfectly, if your DM allows you, worship something else.
There are also ways around "must worship" with DM permission.
Example: I saw a campaign where a cleric worshipped a puppet—not someone being controlled by someone else but a child's toy. Of course, that meant the cleric powers the player had were not granted by deities but by the act of faith alone—a power that actually came from within, but that also didn't nix that other clerics were being powered by their deities and their willpower of faith wasn't the source.
All classes are available for re-flavoring, including Clerics and the source of their powers—keep the mechanics but change the reason behind them.
...but it still comes back to the DM's allowance. DMG says not necessarily while the PHB says necessary (and XGtE says suggested but not rule). That says to me that the DM makes the call.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
Meanwhile, your character sheet doesn't require you to pick any gods whatsoever. It is super easy to do. And, while the cleric class stuff does talk about picking one, it doesn't say you need to. Strictly speaking, it isn't phrased as a requirement. You can just pick "null" for your deity and nothing breaks or goes haywire. You can pick the rivers, or mountains, or clouds, maybe you revere the very concept of your domain as if it were a deity? Why not pick one of those? If that fits your idea of the character you're trying to make there isn't anything stopping you. Well, nothing in the rulebook, anyway.
And for-sure without a shadow of a doubt, nothing is compelling your cleric to "worship" their deity, if they have one.
Let me ask you something. Does a warlock need to choose a Patron? And if the answer is yes (which is yes). Why? Where does it explicitly say that you have to choose a Patron?
A warlock doesn't need to choose a patron, no. They need to choose a type of patron. This choice is reflected in their subclass selection. Just like clerics don't need to choose a god, they need to choose a domain, this choice is reflected in their subclass selection.
It is entirely possible to have a patron and no even know the identity of the thing, some nebulous mysterious being giving select mortals power for its own schemes and machinations.
The rules for character creation do a reasonably good job of accommodating making a wide variety of imaginary people, with diverse personalities and origins. If you ever think that they're restricting you from making the character you want to make, it is likely you've taken a suggestion and interpreted it as a rule. The creative freedom you have in this regard, this facet of the game, is very high. The rules expect you to work out these details with your DM to ensure they fit within his setting, but otherwise you have immense freedom here.
Imagine a character that partied too hard, got blackout drunk, stumbled into the feywild and disappeared for a year and a day, and then wakes up in a field with a hangover, but is now a fey pact warlock. Half the fun would be not knowing who precisely you stuck a bargain with. Like a Dude Who's My Patron?
It is to understand the logic that leads you to sign that your deity can be "null". I can understand you saying that it can be something else, like a concept, or a natural force, or whatever. I don't strictly share it as a general rule, but I get it. But "null"? What domain has "null"? Maybe you mean to choose the "nil/null", as a concept of eternal nothingness or timeless emptiness, or something like that. That, reluctantly, I could buy you. But you have to choose something, at least.
You really don't. I run a setting that reorients the concept of divine power to something that the various gods all can access. Like a wellspring of power and they all know the means to tap into this divine source of energy. But, while historically clerics and divine servants are being fed this energy channeled from the source into their mortal servants, it can happen that a mortal stumbles on the means to access this divinity directly, unaided by a god, and in a similar way they can tap directly into the divine source. In this setting having no-god selected whatsoever is perfectly reasonable. This is just one of many settings where such a concept is not only reasonable but potentially a core theme.
The game mechanics do not attempt to curb this sort of narrative freedom. There are plenty of other settings in which a character might not need a god's help to access divine magic. If their magic came from conviction or faith alone, if divine magic is just something some people have naturally like sorcerers, if divine magic resides in the world around them and some people learn to use it if they pay enough attention, who knows. Imagination is the limit, not the suggested flavor text of the PHB.
Silly question, but how, exactly, would you propose DDB require choice of a deity (or specific Warlock patron)? Would you suggest DDB have some sort of drop down list of every potentially applicable being from every published setting?
It is left of to the DM because it has to be. It is their world, after all.
I agree. I wouldn't suggest they do that at all. My stated opinion here is that the question of which god is so open ended the answer can even be just "Naw I'm set".
By RAW the DM determines the setting, and the deities and rules for how they work. I don't think DDB needs to add any such dropdown because having a deity, and which one, or even if one, is entirely up to the DM and Player to determine. The PHB goes to great length to attempt to get you to ask questions about your cleric's relationship with divinity, because these are all open ended questions.
What answers you give and settle on will help shape your character's narrative in the story you and your group are about to tell. There is no dropdown list for that. Nor should there be one.
They have removed the lock. If you are waiting for them to errata the PHP for you regarding it, that's a bit silly IMO. They have released official books in which clerics can worship things other than deities. When a first source is conflicted by a second, that's an exception. The game is full of things that are presented in this way. It's like your character's base movement being augmented by a spell or feature.
You're getting confused
One thing is that in a specific setting the need to pray to a god is removed, for convenience, otherwise you could not play a cleric, and replace it with something else. That happens in Eberron, and also in the old Dark Sun setting. But that's for that particular setting. Can you play a cleric without needing a god? The short answer is no. The long answer is: As a general rule, no, unless it's possible in your setting (either homebrew, or a specific setting like Eberron). But with the rules in hand you can't say yes. That is false. The rulebook forces you to choose a god, and then there's a specific setting that has a particular rule that substitutes gods for faith. But that's in Eberron or your possible homebrew setting.
This is like if Dark Sun comes out tomorrow, where wizards destroy life by doing their magic (the defilers), and you come to tell me that in D&D, in general, wizards destroy life by doing magic. That's in the Dark Sun setting, not a general rule.
Several posters are quite correct is the statement that clerics do not, in fact, need to choose a god to worship.
A deity isn't a requirement for your cleric to chose a domain. The domain can be supported by several deities all at the same time. They aren't required to be devoted to just one, or one at all. They can be devoted to all of the deities of a pantheon that support that domain. They can be devoted to the concept and philosophy of the domain, regardless of the deity that supports it. Your cleric can abosolutly choose a deity to emulate, or to pattern their beliefs after, but is not a requirement for the mechanical benifit of the domain choice.
Edit: If a cleric were to pick Lathander as their deity, would that grant them access to two domains, or would they only be considerd to worship half of the religious dogma of the church?
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
I'm not confused at all. In Eberron, Wildemount, Ravenloft there are things spelled out for you that you can worship as a cleric that are not true deities. In short, Clerics get their power from faith, not the deity. There is no sidebar or exact sentence that says "In this setting, clerics don't need a deity" in these books. It's all in the lore text, not mechanics text. The same is true in FR where there are examples of clerics getting powers through the worship of dead deities or non-deity subjects of worship. There are things to back this concept of faith over deity up in every official setting really. I'm not saying that this is something you should do without talking to your DM, and mostly this thread is only important in regards to discouraging people from telling others that they are playing wrong because clerics must have deities, but I'd argue as well that it's not really all that setting specific as a concept. Either way, it's not that important. What's important to me is that these purists realize they are mistaken in their beliefs that Clerics must always in every instance worship a Deity or they are not a Cleric and not playing Clerics correctly. The can play how they wish, but they are actually the ones homebrewing by enforcing this sort of imposition on people. It's the same vibe shared by the sorts of people that still insist the same thing about Paladins.
Reading all the comments I think we are not understanding each other, or that things are getting confused.
First, the cleric class needs to choose a god. That is the general rule.However, as in everything, there may be exceptions. Some settings include those exceptions. Okay, but that doesn't override the general rule. It is an exception.
What happens when one does not understand that Eberron, since it has been mentioned, is an exception? That the class loses all the narrative sense. It's not because I'm a purist, it's because that rule is there, and there's a good reason for it. Someone said above that Wizard is going to remove that rule. I don't know, but I'd bet you don't. The rule is there precisely to prevent the class from blurring thematically, and for both the player and the DM to understand how a cleric should behave thematically. Something similar happens with the paladin's oaths, and the box that warns you what can happen if a paladin does not follow his oaths. These kinds of things are not secondary, or to give color. They are essential for the specific gaming experience that the designer proposes to you. Can you do what you want? You can, of course. It's your game. But the game has a design. In this case, the design tells you that Clerics have to choose a god. Then there are specific settings that, for whatever reason, give you other options.
And also, in your setting hombrew, you can do it the way you want. Just like in your setting warlocks might not have a patron and get their powers some other way. But that's in your setting hombrew, not the general rule. I don't think anyone will go to the homebrew subforum and say that clerics need to have a god. It's your setting, do what you want.
To double check if it is a rule that there is a requirement or not, simply ask yourself: Is there a written consequence for not doing it?
Whether or not someone worships a god is a choice they make every day with their actions and deeds, and if they stop doing it, what happens? There isn't an answer to this in 5e, because there isn't a strict requirement that the cleric worship anything whatsoever, let alone have a god. The requirement, is that they have a domain. And there is no behaviors directly required to maintain this class feature, let alone maintain the class.
Everyone is perfectly free to homebrew their own de-leveling system for various classes for various reasons. If you wanna create your own system for how a cleric un-clerics themselves if they don't worship their god hard enough or whatever, that's certainly a thing you could do. But it isn't how the default game expects things to work.
You gain xp, you pick levels, that's that. Your morality, worship, social graces, demeanor, etc have no direct bearing on any of this. You can be a 3ft tall halfling with a 20 strength score, The system for character creation allows for silly results, but it is the system the game uses. Nothing prevents you from creating a completely atheistic cleric of any domain. Is that silly? Might be, depends on the story you and your group are telling.
I got quotes!
Well, this thing about the consequences is interesting. What the rules really tell you is that the first thing you have to do is choose a deity. So if you don't choose her, the consequence is that you can't become a cleric. And beware that, according to the rules, the deity goes before the domain. You choose a deity, and at 2nd level, you choose a domain related to your deity. The deity is the foundation stone of the class.
What consequence is there if you do not pray to your god or follow his designs? The manual does not specify it. So it's up to the DM. Logic says there has to be some consequence, just as logic says if you spit in a king's face there has to be consequences. But it depends on the DM and the story. I would leave him without the benefits of the class, but that's homebrew since it's not in the rulebook. And it really doesn't have to be. Every DM will know how to deal with that.
When the rules override your ability to choose your character's actions, such as whether to worship something or not, they'll be very explicit. You always control your character's choices. Being forced into worshipping a god isn't free will, I'm not even 100% sure most any compulsion effects could accomplish that.
Also, there isn't a non-sentient rock race option. Not sure where you're getting that from, but sounds 3rd party.
I got quotes!
The first thing you have to do is choose a god? I'm not convinced the rules say any such thing. They talk about choosing one, yes. But, I've never seen it phrased as a requirement.
"Worshipping", as the topic question asks about, is an action, anyway, and nothing in the rules compel you to perform this action. You can be as dutiful or as irreverent as you please. You can curse the gods very names. Nothing about these choices, RAW, impact your being or not being a cleric.
I got quotes!
There is no non-sentient rock race option. IDK why you keep bringing it up. You can check the DNDbeyond database and you'll find there isn't one in any 5e supplement in existence. You can homebrew it, sure.
Try it out in a practical sense: Here in DnDBeyond, try to build the character. You can create a cleric without choosing a god. You cannot create a non-sentient rock unless you enable homebrew.
I got quotes!
We are diverting this to absurdity. The class rules tell you that you have to choose a deity. It is the first thing he says in the section Creating a Cleric. I copy below, although it has already been copied many times:
"As you create a cleric, the most important question to consider is which deity to serve and what principles you want your character to embody. The Gods of the Multiverse section includes lists of many of the gods of the multiverse. Check with your DM to learn which deities are in your campaign.
Once you've chosen a deity, consider your cleric's relationship to that god. Did you enter this service willingly? Or did the god choose you, impelling you into service with no regard for your wishes? How do the temple priests of your faith regard you: as a champion or a troublemaker? What are your ultimate goals? Does your deity have a special task in mind for you? Or are you striving to prove yourself worthy of a great quest?"
This entire paragraph refers to that deity. It is obvious that the class is designed thinking that the first thing the player is going to do is choose a deity.
Later, when he talks about your spells, he says the following:
Spellcasting Ability
Wisdom is your spellcasting ability for your cleric spells. The power of your spells comes from your devotion to your deity.
If you have no devotion to your deity, it cannot fuel your spells. It is something implicit.
Then you have to choose your domain depending on the deity you have chosen (not at level 2 as someone said. Your domain is at level 1):
Choose one domain related to your deity: Knowledge, Life, Light, Nature, Tempest, Trickery, or War. The Life domain is detailed at the end of the class description and provides examples of gods associated with it.
In channel divinity it also tells you that it is the energy of your deity that you channel. Again, if you don't have a deity, you can't channel energy from it. It is something that is implicit:
At 2nd level, you gain the ability to channel divine energy directly from your deity, using that energy to fuel magical effects
At 10th level, you gain the ability to pray to your god, and ask for his intervention:
Divine Intervention
Beginning at 10th level, you can call on your deity to intervene on your behalf when your need is great.
Again, the core element of this class ability is your deity. If you don't have deity, you can't do this. You are missing the key element for it.
In no case can it be said that the rules do not force you to choose a deity. They do. It is written in the rules, throughout the class, and insistently. There is nothing in this class as important as that choice.
Now, having said that, it is also true that there are some specific settings that allow you other options that replace your deity. This is clearly done for convenience. There are no deities in those settings, for whatever reason, and it wouldn't be a good design decision to forbid you from using a cleric. So alternatives are sought as a substitute, which is fine. But that does not mean that you no longer have to choose a deity to be cleric.. You must, but there are a number of settings that give you other options.
In summary. Do you have to choose a deity when you become a cleric? Yes, it is in the rules and it is mandatory. It's the pillar of your class.
However, those who argue that there are settings in which you choose it is not a deity, but something else that replaces them, are also right. Regarding those settings, those people are right. But not as a general rule. At least until a general rulebook comes out that changes the core of the class, which hasn't happened.
Naw. It is just a demonstration of what for-sure isn't a rule. That thing you kept bringing up, about playing a rock or whatever. That's not a thing.
Yes actually, that is a perfectly legitimate character. What items you have is between you and your DM and anything you guys decide on is perfectly within the rules.
You are free to use whatever optional rules you and your group is using in your games for determining stats, but you'll have to select those options in dndbeyond, or overwrite them... the hint that you're deviating from normal is the part where you select the alternate option, or directly overwrite the normal value. That's you deviating from normal RAW calculations right there.
I'm not a DnDbeyond authority you'll need to ask the staff about any upcoming updates they're working on.
You still can't play a non-sentient rock and call that RAW. I'm not sure why you're trying to make this argument but it might not be conducive to the topic any longer to drill into any further, really. Can we agree you can't play a rock as your race, by RAW, and move on now?
Meanwhile, your character sheet doesn't require you to pick any gods whatsoever. It is super easy to do. And, while the cleric class stuff does talk about picking one, it doesn't say you need to. Strictly speaking, it isn't phrased as a requirement. You can just pick "null" for your deity and nothing breaks or goes haywire. You can pick the rivers, or mountains, or clouds, maybe you revere the very concept of your domain as if it were a deity? Why not pick one of those? If that fits your idea of the character you're trying to make there isn't anything stopping you. Well, nothing in the rulebook, anyway.
And for-sure without a shadow of a doubt, nothing is compelling your cleric to "worship" their deity, if they have one.
I got quotes!
Let's keep things civil, on topic, and focused on rules please. Any discussions outside the scope of either this thread or the rules subforum should be taken elsewhere
D&D Beyond moderator across forums, Discord, Twitch and YouTube. Always happy to help and willing to answer questions (or at least try). (he/him/his)
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
Site Rules & Guidelines - Homebrew Rules - Looking for Players and Groups Rules
Let me ask you something. Does a warlock need to choose a Patron? And if the answer is yes (which is yes). Why? Where does it explicitly say that you have to choose a Patron?
It is to understand the logic that leads you to sign that your deity can be "null". I can understand you saying that it can be something else, like a concept, or a natural force, or whatever. I don't strictly share it as a general rule, but I get it. But "null"? What domain has "null"? Maybe you mean to choose the "nil/null", as a concept of eternal nothingness or timeless emptiness, or something like that. That, reluctantly, I could buy you. But you have to choose something, at least.
I agree that the PHB tells the user: "the most important question to consider is which deity to serve and what principles you want your character to embody." But from a rules standpoint this is not a requirement to choose a singular deity. I might suggest that the wording of the PHB could have been chosen differently (it wasn't, I'm aware and conceede this) so as to prevent this discussion from happening. Again...
An endpoint to all of this discussion might revolve around the fact that the DM has to decide how the religious pantheons in the game work. Players might consider building a character that works with the world the DM is presenting instead of requireing the DM to build a world to suit their character choices. While the PHB does direct the user to consider how their character interacts with their deity(religion), the DMG suggests the DM be considerate of:
I respect and understand what you are putting forth as an idea, and while the PHB directs a player to make a choice, the DMG assists the DM in making the constraints that form the borders of the world the player will be interacting with. Without the DM's input, published setting or not, the player cannot make a selection. The selection array will be absent. Additionally, if a player wants to work with the DM so as to devote their character's religious conviction to a philosophy, cause, ideal or set of dogmatic commandments, that can be accommodated for with the DM's concurrence.
This is the basis for saying that: No, by RAW, a cleric is not required to follow or declare a deity. They are required to choose a domain. (See 1st bullet point.)
And yes, the DMG even makes concessions for using published settings and how they interact with the DM. This is a general and core assumption that potentially affects every game of D&D that has a DM. This is the baseline from which those exceptional settings venture away from.
Edit: Grammar
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
So I think we can agree that as a general rule clerics have to choose a deity. That's the design of the class. However, in your particular setting, it doesn't have to be that way.
That's a bit of a truism, by the way. In my setting I can do whatever I want. Players might not have to choose a race, because there would only be 1. Or they might all start with a feat, since they're demigods or whatever. In that case, such an argument simply serves to end almost all forum discussions. Which is right. Obviously in my game I do what I want, and that's what the DMG tells you. Don't you want gods? Do not include them in your game. Do you want to have only one religion? Nothing happens. Do you want your clerics to serve ideas? It's your world, do what you want.
But you have to understand that you are changing the game. Is there something wrong with it? No. But then you can't use that as an argument to say that a class works one way or another. In a particular way, in fact, you could make it work however you want. That's what the homebrew subforum is for, I understand.
I have changed my mind. In the PHB it clearly tells you that you have to choose a deity, but in the DMG it makes it clear that you don't. Thus, to the question "Does a cleric have to worship a god?" The answer is "not necessarily".
Still, I think you should. But RAW you can perfectly, if your DM allows you, worship something else.
There are also ways around "must worship" with DM permission.
Example: I saw a campaign where a cleric worshipped a puppet—not someone being controlled by someone else but a child's toy. Of course, that meant the cleric powers the player had were not granted by deities but by the act of faith alone—a power that actually came from within, but that also didn't nix that other clerics were being powered by their deities and their willpower of faith wasn't the source.
All classes are available for re-flavoring, including Clerics and the source of their powers—keep the mechanics but change the reason behind them.
...but it still comes back to the DM's allowance. DMG says not necessarily while the PHB says necessary (and XGtE says suggested but not rule). That says to me that the DM makes the call.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
A warlock doesn't need to choose a patron, no. They need to choose a type of patron. This choice is reflected in their subclass selection. Just like clerics don't need to choose a god, they need to choose a domain, this choice is reflected in their subclass selection.
It is entirely possible to have a patron and no even know the identity of the thing, some nebulous mysterious being giving select mortals power for its own schemes and machinations.
The rules for character creation do a reasonably good job of accommodating making a wide variety of imaginary people, with diverse personalities and origins. If you ever think that they're restricting you from making the character you want to make, it is likely you've taken a suggestion and interpreted it as a rule. The creative freedom you have in this regard, this facet of the game, is very high. The rules expect you to work out these details with your DM to ensure they fit within his setting, but otherwise you have immense freedom here.
Imagine a character that partied too hard, got blackout drunk, stumbled into the feywild and disappeared for a year and a day, and then wakes up in a field with a hangover, but is now a fey pact warlock. Half the fun would be not knowing who precisely you stuck a bargain with. Like a Dude Who's My Patron?
You really don't. I run a setting that reorients the concept of divine power to something that the various gods all can access. Like a wellspring of power and they all know the means to tap into this divine source of energy. But, while historically clerics and divine servants are being fed this energy channeled from the source into their mortal servants, it can happen that a mortal stumbles on the means to access this divinity directly, unaided by a god, and in a similar way they can tap directly into the divine source. In this setting having no-god selected whatsoever is perfectly reasonable. This is just one of many settings where such a concept is not only reasonable but potentially a core theme.
The game mechanics do not attempt to curb this sort of narrative freedom. There are plenty of other settings in which a character might not need a god's help to access divine magic. If their magic came from conviction or faith alone, if divine magic is just something some people have naturally like sorcerers, if divine magic resides in the world around them and some people learn to use it if they pay enough attention, who knows. Imagination is the limit, not the suggested flavor text of the PHB.
I got quotes!
I agree. I wouldn't suggest they do that at all. My stated opinion here is that the question of which god is so open ended the answer can even be just "Naw I'm set".
By RAW the DM determines the setting, and the deities and rules for how they work. I don't think DDB needs to add any such dropdown because having a deity, and which one, or even if one, is entirely up to the DM and Player to determine. The PHB goes to great length to attempt to get you to ask questions about your cleric's relationship with divinity, because these are all open ended questions.
What answers you give and settle on will help shape your character's narrative in the story you and your group are about to tell. There is no dropdown list for that. Nor should there be one.
I got quotes!