To be honest, I've intentionally stayed away from the pantheon, other than categorizing them and linking them appropriately where needed. With that statement, I suppose I'll tell you why now.
Originally Posted by Steel General
First, a preface: I think your work in this pantheon is amazingly detailed and complete. As far as pantheons go, as best I can tell, it's just as good as any published pantheon I've seen. In all fairness, however, gods and religions are something that I've never really concerned myself with in any games I've run.
This is strictly my personal opinion, but I'm not convinced that the CWBP needs a designated pantheon. Our original goal here was to make this world system agnostic, meaning you could incorporate it into any fantasy setting you want. That any part of the CWBP world is tied to a specific deity (such as the relationship of Akron with Aldamar), to me, is counterproductive to that goal. If I wanted to use Ansium in a typical D&D 4e game with a standard pantheon, I'd first have to research Aldamar in the CWBP Pantheon to find a suitable alternative in the core D&D product. Not that it's impossible, but I think it'd be much easier to say that the people of Raedis revere a deity devoted to justice and law rather than assigning a specific deity (I think that'd be Erathis in 4e, btw - but a far cry from Pelor, who is probably assumed the 'head deity in 4e, like Aldamar in your pantheon).
That being said, I completely agree with having a standard pantheon for use in the CWBP for those who want an alternative to the default for whatever setting they're using. If you look at the entry I made for Lhessadrak, you'll notice a "see also" section in which I mentioned that Dyrge would be a good choice for a DM wishing to use the CWBP pantheon, but didn't include any specific references in the body of the page. I think that anyone incorporating Lhessadrak into a 4e game will automatically see Vecna, while anyone wanting something a bit different will be thankful for the Dyrge reference. Again, just my opinion.
My job, however, is not to realign the CWBP to how *I* think it should be, but to make it a cohesive unit all the way around. If people want to designate a specific deity to a region, then I can't veto that decision.
Now on to your original request: reformatting the CWBP pantheon. If I were to do it, this is what I'd do:
I would remove the specific 3e/3.5e elements, ie: portfolio, cleric alignments, and favored weapons.
I would re-work the deities' alignment to something a little more generic (good, evil, none). I'm not familiar with any system other than D&D, so I'm not sure if the law/chaos axis is common in most other systems or not.
I would roll the portfolios and domains into a single "areas of influence" section.
Lastly, I think the list should be pruned a bit. That's just a lot of freakin' gods. That's one of the things I hated about 3e Forgotten Realms... just too many.
In short, I'd turn them all into 4e deities, where a single paragraph provides the same usable information as the big 3e table, without all the extras. (What, exactly, is a dogma, anyway?)
I hope that at least some of this post makes sense. And I certainly hope nobody was offended by it, as it certainly wasn't intended as a knock on your work. If I were looking for a 3e pantheon to use in my own campaign, I'd certainly snag yours up in a heartbeat.
Wow IG! I'm just so glad that you're working on it and giving it so much thought!
@IG - I understand where you're coming from. I wasn't asking you to rewrite any of it.
I only asked because you seem to be a real wiz at the WIKI stuff. When I first put them out there I just copy/pasted HTML code and haven't touched them since.
I will definitely take your suggestions in mind if/when I get around to re-doing them.
Eh, I don't know about a wiz.. To be honest, I've never edited a wiki before in my life before I started messing with the CWBP. Personally, I think the tables that are there now are perfectly fine with the information that you're presenting. Don't think I'd change anything, personally. Did you have something specific in mind?
Originally Posted by Steel General
No nothing specific.
It's not a big deal really, it's fine as is, just thought they could use a bit of 'sprucing up'. :)