Gods and deities of all kinds are always a factor in determining the feel and outlook of any Dungeons and Dragons campaign setting. The attitudes, portfolios, functions, ranking, recognition, and number of gods play a key factor in determining the campaign world itself. It is this last quality—number--which concerns me.
I beleive that in the standard Dungeons and Dragons cosmology there are an overabundance of gods and divine entities. The Players Handbook presents the base pantheon, made up of 19 gods, including the racial gods for the core races. These gods represent broad, widely encompassing categories, and are known well, serving their purpose and acting as symbols of the continual functions of existence. However, other books try to impress more deities upon the standard cosmology, flooding the multiverse with divinities.
The first problem I have is with racial deities. It seems as though every single race, subrace, and monster has their own racial deity nowadays. I'm not saying that these races and creatures lack importance in the game world, far from it, but they tend to overlap in their function and domain. For example, Corellon Larethian is the god of elves, but the aquatic elves have their own god (Deep Sashelas) as do the drow (Lolth). Some deities exist even when the race in question has little or no society or inherent religious following, such as ghouls and their god, Doresain.
The next problem are deities of a similar nature. In Libris Mortis, there are four death gods, one of whom is not actually a god (Orcus). Even though these deities have extremely different outlooks on death and undeath (especially Evening Glory), their very existence creates an unnecessary overlap in the pantheon, more so in that these divinities don't oppose each other. The Greek Ares and Athena were both war gods, but with opposing philosophies and warring interests. There are not only too many gods, but these gods can be so similar that their inclusion seems extraneous. We don't need Nerull to perform the same duties as Incabulos, or Kyuss, or Falazure, or any of a dozen other death gods, one (or even two) is plenty.
Finally, there is the associated problem of an overabundance of domains. Most players would say that more domains improve the game, and they certainly can. However, when the game branchs off from the Death domain to include the Deathbound, Undeath, and Pestilence domains, or when the Air domain has to exist side by side with the Windstorm and Wind domains, or when each race needs a domain, every energy type needs a domain, every creature type needs a domain, all the planes require a domain, I feel it has gotten a little out of hand. From a purely fluff standpoint, the extra inclusion of these domains is too bewildering to a player character trying to decide his faith. From a rules standpoint, some of these are similar to each other. Some domains don't even include spells that are particularly similar to each other. They seem just like a vain effort to make each new deity unique, when the inclusion of these deities itself can disrupt the ideas of the game.
Small wonder that many DMs make their own pantheon, or a monotheistic world, or sometimes a world with no gods at all! In most polytheistic mythologies, deities are meant to embody certain emotions or phenomena, or serve as explanations of other unknown events or forgotten customs; they don't exist just to justify the various beliefs of every living being on the planet. I'm not saying that DMs should not include more deities; indeed it is not my place to say such things. All I'm saying is that the inclusion of more gods than necessary is polluting the intent and form of the campaign. In short, a multitude of gods is not the way to make a campaign more interesting or enthralling.
First, I have the D&D world Scarred Lands. That world contains two main pantheons: The Nine Victors (one god for each alignment) and the thirteen titans (who range between all neutral alignments except Lawful Neutral, but most of them seem to be neutral evil). It also has a lot of minor gods, but the cosmology is such that these are irrelevant. Every alignment has one plane. The material world is the true neutral planes, and the eight main gods (the nine victors minus the true neutral titan who fought on their side in the war) rule one high plane each. The lesser gods are merely inhabitants of their planes.
Second, I have Altor 626. This is a world I made mostly myself, including all the cosmology. It have "Nine = Three = One" God. There are nine elements fighting each other, and three primal forces fighting each other. The war is endless, and is claimed to keep the cycle of life spinning. However, it also has the more sinister purpose of keeping the mortals down, pretty much like in the book 1984.
The nine elemental lords (yes, this world have nine elements, including the four standard ones) combine into three primal powers. Earth, water and air combines into the primal force of life. Fire, light and heat combines into the primal force of divine light. Darkness, cold and ether combines into the primal force of death. The three primal forces each in their turn combine into The One God. However, this three-layered entity is fighting a constant battle with itself about what layer should control the universe.
Third, I have Maladora. In this world, there are only two deities. One that tries to devour mankind, and one that tries to save it by enslaving it.
In my opinion, the assumed surfeit of deities is easily accommodated by encouraging a depth of culture in the world you're building, making sure various countries have their own mythologies and beliefs, and assigning the various deities where they best fit. If you're worried about all these divine beings overpopulating the planes, that's also easily remedied--give some gods multiple names and facets.
Taking your example from Libris Mortis, perhaps Doresain, worshipped primarily in my imagined world's Ghoul Kingdom of Hychrast, is in actuality an aspect of Nerull, who is worshipped as the primary death deity in the neighboring kingdom of Steinhelm. Meanwhile, in the distant Moonstone Empire of Cientphaile, the very same deity receives prayers and grants clerics spells in the identity of Wee Jas. Having different people worship the same deities under different names is not a new concept, and is supported by the very Greco-roman pantheon that most people think of when they hear the word "pantheon".
Ultimately, however the choice is yours as world builder. If you want your entire world to worship one basic pantheon for simplicity's sake, then by all means, make it so. But please don't consider the option of other deific possibilities a flaw in the system.
;)
It's a nice read, but wrong-headed.
The problem is not that there's too many gods. If you compare D&D's array of gods to historical Earth - or even historical polytheistic subcontinents (I'm looking at you, Europe and India!) - D&D is striking impoverished in terms of deities. The reason for this is that D&D gives as a world religion. One.Boring!
Athena and Ares arise as civic deities for two of the most warlike polis of ancient Hellas: expansionist, literary Athens, and conservative, martial Sparta. But there were scads of other war gods kicking around while those two were doing the rounds.
So, my general feeling here is: spread the gods around, and not just in a FR "people here mostly worship this guy but recognise the others". Religious war isn't a must-have (indeed, I tend to think it's a bad idea in most settings) - some pagans were fairly tolerant of other people having different gods - but diversity is. When the PCs travel beyond their homeland, they should discover worshippers of alien gods: heck, when they travel outside of their province, they ought to meet worshippers of strange gods who they'd heard of but not heard about!
A few posters have mentioned that throughout history, there have been countless deities. The problem with that comparison is that the deities in a D&D world have shown themselves and are undeniably real. Again, this is saying a lot, since I'm a fairly religious person (which doesn't matter). Where religion on Earth is based on faith, religion in D&D is based on loyalty to powers whose existence one cannot deny.
The argument I have with the number of deities, which is mentioned in the original post, is twofold. One, they have far too many overlapping powers. Two, they are all *real*.
Having a plethora of gods is not necessarily a bad thing, but if you really take a look at what a vast majority of gods in polytheistic (more on this word later) real-world religions were supposed to do - their 'portfolios' if you will, they were far more limited. Though D&D seems to give a nod to this concept with the idea of divine rank and such, the historical reality is that most religions were either philosophically monotheistic (if not practically so), and even those with intentional polytheism saw deities that generally had very limited, very personal effects. Consider a few examples from the far east, since that area has been pointed to as the major counterpoint for the Greco-Roman stereotype:
Buddhism - Though the Buddha has several facets depending on the school of Buddhism, there is generally a monotheistic (sometimes bordering on atheistic) bent to Buddhism as a whole. The epic pantheon of characters are demigods at best, far more on the D&D level of powerful outsiders than true deities.
Hinduism - A Hindu friend of mine once said, "All Hindu are Christian." His point was that Hindu,--despite its dizzying array of avatars-- has a monotheistic bent as well. The many "deities" of Hinduism are, in fact, philosophical extensions of the one true 'entity' that governs the universe. Again, many of the characters in Hindu lore are likable to D&D demons and angels, but hardly would hold the kind of world-altering powers that D&D deities have.
Taoism - The best example I can think of for a bona-fide polytheistic religion. Taoist deities are many and varied, easily numbering in the thousands, if not tens of thousands. However, the overall scope of Taoist deities is once again fairly limited. A great majority either have very general 'portfolios' (health, luck, wealth), and often can only manifest their power in a dynamic way over a very limited area.
Shinto - Similar in many ways to Taoism, Shinto has a similar sense about it. Gods walk among mortals, but are often extremely limited in their abilities. The reasons for this go far back into the collective mindset of the far-east, but generally, as with Taoism, the deities interact in personal, subtle ways.
That's just a few examples, and I apologize for the extremely oversimplified characterizations. My point, though, is that the D&D pantheon is unlike any of these. in D&D deities are very real, and, as a rule, are actively involved with the world (via their clerics). This fact, combined with the staggering number of deities, and their often overlapping spheres of influence leads me to conclude that religious warfare should be a staple of D&D. Indeed, what is the cleric but a jihadist for his religion (and the paladin too, for those that force paladins to devote themselves to a religion)? What's worse, in D&D there is no question of whether your side is 'right' or 'wrong'. Your deity is very real, and so is the deity of your enemy. You are both 'right' when your god tells you to go wipe out the other. Indeed, despite the earth precedent for relative tolerance (though this is debatable), I see no reason why the epic egos of deities shouldn't be constantly clashing, and dragging the whole world down with them. Even the original 19 is more than enough to keep any DM busy. I am certain the current count is somewhere over 40, probably much higher even than that. With that many deities that are all very real, and with many of them actively involved in mortal affairs, it creates a mess that I don't blame most DMs for wanting to avoid.
In short, I sympathize completely with the original poster, and agree heartily. Having so many deities seems not only somewhat unnecessary from a fluff standpoint, but given the nature of deities in D&D as related to clerics and portfolios, it seems that there should be no time for 'mortal' fun like dungeon crawling, when there's always a holy war to get everyone riled up over...
Just my $0.02
On the other hand, the campaign setting that I'm working on, Ainae (coming soon!) has no proof of gods. The Order of the Emerald Mirror, a group of diviners who use magic to discover things in the past, have found evidence that there was once a small pantheon known as the Lord High Gods. What has since happened to these gods is unknown. Some people still worship them, the barbarian tribes worship their own gods, and some people are atheists. One could rule this as being either polytheistic or atheistic, especially depending on the way the DM runs the game. They could easily run a game where the gods are real and active, or a game where the gods do not exist.
I suppose my point here is that the "problem" is not so much a problem as a matter of choice. I'll agree that the number of gods has gotten outrageous for DMs to handle, and it doesn't help when your players come in worshipping some god from a sourcebook you don't have. But it's not like it's really an issue to deal with, as you can just ignore the gods altogether and just use them as an ideal for the players to work up to.
So I think the D&D pantheon is fine the way it is. You can have a serious overabundance of gods, the standard D&D pantheon, the confusion of your religion because of geographic location, or monotheism.
As far as the domains, I like options. However, some things are starting to get ridiculous. The spell compendium helped, but it is only holding back the tides of chaos...
A few posters have mentioned that throughout history, there have been countless deities. The problem with that comparison is that the deities in a D&D world have shown themselves and are undeniably real. Again, this is saying a lot, since I'm a fairly religious person (which doesn't matter). Where religion on Earth is based on faith, religion in D&D is based on loyalty to powers whose existence one cannot deny.
At the risk of thread-drift, this raises the question of the nature of godhood. Does a god rely upon 'fealty' (I'd say faith, but it's not really accurate in this case), or some other source of power? If it's not fealty, then why would they care what happened on the material plane; if it is fealty, then that's going to put numbers of gods down to the balance of divine power in the world.
However, I'm more concerned with stressing cultural differences: that requires a plurality of gods (and suggests, if not entails, somewhat distant deities).
The real issue here is about the DM's imagination and their capacity to cope with the results of it. It doesn't matter if your campaign has over 1,000 gods....if you can keep up with them all. Few can.
I like new gods, particularly racial gods for intelligent species, as they give me something new to put before my players. But I don't write portfolios on them all, at least not until I have a player who either wants to roleplay a cleric or follower of such a god, or until the characters become seriously involved with such individuals. Mostly, I give them a nodding introduction to the players' characters, then maybe present a "typical" cleric of the religion for them to either deal with or defeat. Simple as that.
The secret to keeping gods manageable is to keep them aloof from your campaign's affairs, until such time as their influence has a direct bearing on your game. If your game involves intense deity participation in the everyday world, then make it the intense involvement of only a few deities, at least in the character's immediate region. You'll soon find that you no longer have a god problem.
D&D is all about imagination, and as DMs you have final say on anything that goes into your campaign. If you really don't want so many gods, don't have them! But don't say there are too many gods in the game, because there aren't. There are just too many for your tastes.
Personally, I find that there is a shortage of decent gods in the D&D pantheon. You take Libris Mortis, the design strategy there is to come up with a weird letter arrangement that looks vaguely like a name and spout some generic statements about the god. In 2nd Edition Forgotten Realms they did the Faiths & Avatars and Powers & Pantheon books and these set the standard for discussions of D&D deities, sadly WOTC hasn't come close to matching the depth and quality of these books. I suspect this is one of the reasons, in addition to living in a postmodern world, that deities have fallen out of favor with so many.
I also suspect that most DMs who like gods, like myself, design their own pantheons, because the D&D pantheon is so lifeless. My pantheon has 50+ full deities, countless quasi-deities including river gods, sea gods, mountain gods, other nature gods, divine agents & messengers, and so forth. I believe in choice, I have had players come to me and say shouldn't there be a God of Apathy or a God of Dueling, and I figured why not and add two more deities.
My players love the idea of having so many deities, because it allows them to pick a deity to match their character. I also like the idea of a richly divine world; it harkens to ancient mythology which is where I find a lot of my inspiration as a DM. But I fully recognize this is a matter of choice and play style, D&D does not really need gods or pantheons.
Buddhism is probably one of the real world religions closest to D&D mythology. There are hell beings, hungry ghosts, animals, humans, demigods, and gods. All of them die and are reborn, your rebirth is based upon your final mental state. If memory serves pride for example is the means to rebirth as a god and “attachment” is needed to come back as a human. Gods are powerful, but they are prideful, arrogant, and wrapped up in their rather petty existences, not unlike the Greek or Norse mythology. In some Buddhists traditions, such as Tibetan, they worship Bodhisattvas and Buddhas who are of out of the cycle of rebirth. Some local traditions add in worship of deities, which is why Buddhism is very diverse religion. It would be wrong to equate Buddhas and Bodhisattvas as celestial beings, because there are asuras, dakinis, and other beings which fit that description better within the religion. The trick is to realize that their power come from being outside of the cycle. They are like a 20th level monk who is no longer human nor truly an outsider, but in that nether realm in-between.
Deities sans interaction
The deities don't give a crap about the world of mortals. They may or may not exist--nobody has any proof of them.
You say potato
Just because folks worship lots of pantheons, each with lots of deities, doesn't mean that there really are that many deities. One deity could have numerous names (and numerous domains if you choose to include them all), and just show whatever face they deem most suitable to a particular group of worshipers. This covers everything from redundant pantheons to a monotheistic approach with facet entities.
But are they real?
Pretty much any sentient creature has the ability to fabricate and worship the concept of a deity. In a world where power can be claimed by anyone with the talent (sorcerer, wizard, bard) or the will (druid, ranger, paladin), just believing that a deity exists may be enough to draw on whatever power a worshipper attributes to their deity.
Power struggle
If that many deities actually give a crap about what each other are doing, sooner or later they'd end up duking it out personally. Before this event, holy wars and other let's-screw-with-the-mortals games could provide them with conflict resolution. After such an event, lots of formerly powerful deities would have ceased to exist, possibly turning a large chunk of the world into an uninhabitable wasteland of ultrapowerful creatures during the battle. Remaining deities could reasonably pick up the slack for their fallen brethren, absorbing their followers (see "You say potato" above), or those creatures could be left without patron deities altogether, worshipping their fallen deities in name only, and wondering why they have been forsaken.
Small Gods (aka Discworld theory)
Deities exist because people worship them. Start worshipping a deity, and *poof*, there it is. The more worshippers a deity gets, the more powerful it becomes. This doesn't necessarily make a deity grateful, but the more people witness their power (either directly or through clerics), the more worshippers they gain, and the more powerful they become. If the followers of two powerful deities go to war, they'll each lose a lot of followers (and therefore a lot of power), so much of the competition among deities occurs through scheming and/or small-scale avatar battles. They can't directly kill each other, because people believing in them would just bring them right back.
Godlings
Just because something is called a god doesn't make it an all-powerful being. This is more applicable to D&D creatures than D&D gods, so I won't really go into it. See posts above about minor regional deities.
What I do hate are the racial deities. Why can't every race worship the same pantheon? Of course, there could be doctrine/theological differences, but there's no reason IMO to have gods whose only portfolio is "elves" or "dwarves." I'd rather have elves following woodland deities, dwarves praying to earth or crafts deities, orcs to war gods and so on, using different rituals and approaches than those that are used by different races.
But that isn't necessarily a good thing. How does a god with a tiny knot of worshippers provide the power to cast 9th level spells, while Pelor can do the exact same thing? Logically, it's a bit silly. Moreover, it's bewildering to a new player, having a stack of gods yea high to dig through.
I'm a huge fan of Eberron's system of deities. If you haven't seen the book, let me break it down. There are only three basic religions:
First is the Six and Sovereign. The Dark Six and the Sovereign Host are a pantheon of deities that most people worship. The Six are evil and destructive; the Host are good and benevolent.
However, in a very interesting (to me) twist, not everyone who worships the Six is evil. In fact, many people worship BOTH halves of the pantheon! The Six represent the dark side of humanity, and are worshiped by propitiation, that is, sacrifice for protection. For example, before a sea voyage, a sailor might burn a model ship at the altar of the Devourer, thereby protecting his own ship by sacrificing a representation.
The second big religion is the Silver Flame, which basically covers all the monotheistic types. Their basic idea is that if the gods even exist, they're far away and don't pay attention to mere humans, but the Flame, which binds demons, supposedly takes the souls of the holy to continue its protection of mankind from evil beings. (The Gods in Eberron ARE distant, and may not exist; they never, ever manifest.) There are some offshoot religions that worship the silver flame even though they've never heard of the Church of the Silver Flame.
The third group of religions isn't a single religion as such, but a group: The Cults of the Dragon Below. Basically, it encompasses all the demon-worshiping, madness-loving subcults that show up from time to time.
And that's about it for religion. Now, the sea elves may worship one of the Host, but they don't call him Dol Arrah -- they call him the Maker, or some such thing. They're still worshiping the same being, just with a different name.
Buddhism - Though the Buddha has several facets depending on the school of Buddhism, there is generally a monotheistic (sometimes bordering on atheistic) bent to Buddhism as a whole. The epic pantheon of characters are demigods at best, far more on the D&D level of powerful outsiders than true deities.
Buddhism is non theistic. It is not really a religion it's more of a philosophy. The basic teaching of Buddhism is the four noble truths explain suffering and the cause of suffering. Buddha was not a deity he was “the enlightened one.” He warned against faith and rather to base your beliefs on what you have observed.
These champion gods are powerful enough to grant high level spells to clerics (I don't call them demigods because they don't fit the D&D definition), but they are nothing compared to the seven main gods. To simplify things I use standard D&D racial deities, sometimes with modifications, as my champion deities. That way references to racial gods in the books still apply. The purpose of the champion gods is campaign flavor and variety. The main divine conflicts are between six of the seven major deities.
“Real” Deities:
On the one hand, with too many real deities, when major events start to take place, things could get extremely complicated (especially if it’s a world like Oerth or Toril where major events happen between once a year and every week). If there was a war between two separate peoples, each call upon their deities to bless the fight, would the two war deities actually duel (or just arm wrestle) to see which gets to step in?
On the other hand, why not have several dozen (or hundred) “real” deities? With that many, none could actually act on every minor mortal squabble. If it’s available read “the consequences of the mighty” page 84 of the forgotten realms campaign guide.
so many people complain about how us power epic type characters don’t step in and rebuild the world to be a better place, a paradise where nothing bad happens. Well, first it isn’t certain that we could actually do that if we tried. Second, it isn’t possible to foresee when changing some for the good here might ruin all good there. Third, it’s hard to agree with what should be done (if I thought a permanent summer was a good idea, but you like having seasons…). Fourth, big changes can seldom be affected by small actions (how much would have to be done to take a nation, eliminate the current government, and replace it with one you feel more suited to the job?). Five and final, us epic guys aren’t blind you know. If I take an action here, seven others (at the least) will take notice and try to counter me. And that’s trying to get a song I like made popular.
As for many deities clashing against each other… the outer planes are infinite. WHY would they have to clash on the mortal plane? That’s what the outer planes are for, events that are too big, powerful, and REAL, for the material plane.
Overabundance of Domains
That’s actually got less to do with the number of deities than you might think. The vast number of domains comes from the vast number of spells that aren’t in the PHB, and trying to add them beyond basic casting lists. Several (but by no means all) additional domains are made to order for 4-5 spells that the designer felt to be domain worthy. Different ways to deal with this include;
- Allowing spell swapping for similar domains (lose acid fog in the water domain in exchange for waterspout from PGtF’s ocean domain).
- Allowing domain grouping (a deity that has the water domain also has the ocean and rain domains, except when this is illogical due to portfolio, such as with a goddess of the desert monsoon or a deep sea god).
- ignore it (at most, you’ll have two domain-casters in the party, unless everyone has to be a multiclass cleric or something. Just don’t throw as many domain-casters into the mix, as allies or enemies. Whether you disallow a spell, domain, deity, or pantheon is up to you, but that doesn’t mean it has to be cut, simply not present).
On the other hand, there are domains that just don’t help anything. These should probably be cut, or at least changed.
On Godhood
Remember the question, a god what makes?
Creation at The Beginning.
Raised to divinity by another deity.
Ascended to divinity through personal effort (whether demonic sacrifice, or true enlightenment, as the campaign goes).
They are Believed In.
Created by some Divine Event (Athena, Aphrodite, Finder Wyvernspur, Eriond)
Simply willed themselves into existence.
If, on earth (you know, this one) every god that had a smattering of belief was real…
On the other hand; who says all of the gods are “real”? Maybe Doresain has no divine connection at all. Maybe it’s just the belief in him than grants spells, but there is nothing there to actually contact. Remember certain clerics gain their powers from their belief in an abstract concept, such as good or evil. Maybe some “deities” are just such concepts.
On Racial Deities
Why should each race get their own deity? Consider humans in D&D don’t actually get one. Is it because humans are too flighty… oh wait! *stops typing in order to take tango lessons* or is it a sign that racial deities can be limited? Come-on, if one of the core races doesn’t get one, why should every mass of semi-intelligent fungi get one?
On the other hand, I’ve actually made a human racial deity; Mike. Mike is a strange one; like Aphrael, Mike repeatedly gets born, but he grows up, marries (or not), and dies, to be reborn again (living out dozens of lives at a time, no godly power used, just to be human). God, is he adaptable.
On Clerics and Holy Wars (Jihads)
Why are Clerics so martially inclined, unless the ARE jihadists, or templars out to convert the heathens? They are fully armored casters that can hit hard, and then heal their allies (who can often hit harder).
Martially Inclined? It’s because there are so MANY freaking monsters out there that unless the priest is fully armed and armored, it wouldn’t be able to spread the word, because the word would be lunch. Not to mention all of the monsters that must be hunted down and destroyed to keep the faithful safe and as a sign of that deity’s power.
On Overlapping Portfolios
Personally I classify portfolio components on three levels:
major (fire, death, healing, elves)
medial (magical fire, violent death, medicinal healing, aquatic elves)
and minor (forest fires, killing for pay, healing for pay, elven artists)
I don’t allow multiple deities to have the same major portfolio component, unless they are direct enemies, who constantly fight over that aspect of their nature. I never allow any medial or minor portfolio components to be shared. This means that there might be 8 fire gods (nature and fire, destruction and fire, fire mages, forest fires, sacrificial fires, healing flame, pyrokinesis, elemental fire), that are actively separate. Some would be subservient to the two greater fire deities, while one or two could be part of a pantheon and simply pay lip service to those greater powers of fire.
Though such project can only be taken so far. 23 different deities of fire get to be troublesome, and that’s if you can even keep track of who is (most) important when. Having more than 1 deity for any given chunk of the overall portfolio isn’t always a good idea, and is often just a pain. Of course, quasi-deities don’t actually need portfolio components, but if you’ve reduced the number of active deities, there shouldn’t be too many sideling ones either.
Stuff Worth Mentioning
Consider, the Elenium and Tamuli in the two Sparhawk trilogies by David Eddings.
The gods
The troll gods (5: eat, mate, kill, cold, fire),
The Styric elder gods (unknown number: Azash was the only example and was considered perverted by the others),
The Styric younger gods (1,000,???: the only examples are Aphrael the thief and eternal child, Romalic, Setras, and the Derian ally-god’s name)
The Elene god (never show up: basically Christian copy)
The Tumul gods (unknown number: flighty children the lot of them)
The Atan god (never show up: formal, warrior race)
Cyrgon (the god of the cyrgai, ultimately conservative war god)
Edaemus (the god of the delphae, basically psionic/enlightened god)
There were also powerless ones--gods that have no believers anymore.
The Lamork gods (not real in the least, so belief isn’t worth squat without an original focus), and Klael and Bhelliom, two cosmic powers that busy themselves by creating and fighting over whole worlds.
Altogether Mr. Eddings must have used statted deities (because Cyrgon and Setras were stupid for the least of reasons, the best being that Cyrgon and Azash both died). The gods & goddesses weren’t omnipotent, omnipresent or omnicognisant (all powerful/present/knowing).
There were literally a thousand gods in the younger Styric pantheon and they NEVER had a holy war; the semi-war with Azash doesn’t count. Why? It’s because David Eddings didn’t set portfolios or anything like that. There were 1,000 sibling deities and that was that, with anything along the lines of a portfolio due to personal activity rather than duty (Especially Aphrael. I just bet she volunteered to be the one to steal those rings, insisted even).
Another thought; how could the various deities of the cosmos be crowded? The outer planes are infinite. With the limited number of total worshipers available, that could be one thing, but then racial deities make all the more sense (why worship a generic god of rock and crafting when you could have the founder of your race to show how unique your people are?). But, if outer plane real-estate is actually infinite (as all of the books say), there could be (should be) an infinite number of possible worshipers out living on those planes. I just don’t see how deities could be crowded (unless you’ve got a case of a dozen fire gods all claiming to be the primary source of flame, but that’s a matter of portfolio, not simple divine population).
Also, how much does portfolio MATTER? If a deities portfolio is a list of rights and responsibilities making portfolios something to go to holy war over, then that’s one thing, but what if the portfolio is just of list of the deities interests? You could have a thousand or even a hundred thousand deities, and have NONE of them matter for their universe! Just because core D&D (and RL superstition) contributed the various aspects of reality as the duties of the deities, doesn’t mean you have to!
Finally, on non-statted deities; combining this with divine overpopulation is bad, because this means you have too many deities to organize and all of them are (relatively) all powerful (at least compared to mortals). Personally, I wouldn’t actually use non-statted deities, but if I were to, it would be with as few deities as possible (no racial, all generic ideas) and there would be a perfect understanding of not interfering in the material world (beyond granting spells, giving orders, creating champions and such) and the rules would be enforced by some even greater power (the DM, I mean Creator) that only the deities can speak to.
I agree with previous posters; it’s not a matter of too many or too few for the system but for the players and the DM. if a group of players is irritated because the DM won’t allow more than the core powers, that’s a problem. But if the DM is swamped with work attempting to organize a theologically based campaign when dealing with non-core deities, that’s bad too. I’d personally say the right number of deities for a game is between 2 and 20,000 so that leaves a wide margin for use. Sorry, I dislike monotheism, it sucks for realistic enemies. Current project; 300 (portfolios matter, but not that much).
I was panning on adding 2 Cp, but it seems I’ve left a toonie.
I think it's not number of gods that's so important, but pantheons. Like Keenath, the Soverign Host is one of the reasons I really like Eberron. (I'd like to add, the Blood of Vol and the Path of Light also spawn clerics, but they worship abstract ideals like the Silver Flame does.) Tying the evil gods into a pantheon gives them a stronger relation to the world in general and allows ordinary people to acknowledge their existence without being EEEEVIL.
If, instead of Correlon, elven priests worshiped the elven pantheon in general, I wouldn't mind so much having Deep Sashelas hanging around. He's the general water-element god, the specific creator of the aquatic variant of Correlon Larethian's elves, and basically the elven Poseidon. And yes, honestly, you should either choose to use only racial pantheons, or only generalist ones. A pantheon should always allow generic followers, and in fact that should make up the bulk of their worshipers.
The only way I could conceive of having all of the gods present is to strip them of their omnipotence. The gods are fully stated as per Deities and Demigods and have no other powers other than what their class levels, magic items, and divine ranks allow. They are in essence ultra powerful characters who began life as a mortal and all religious mortals in my D&D universe are in essence a form of ancestor worshippers.
The payoff for this kind of arrangement is that the gods are killable and replaceable monsters. The characters are into epic play now and once they hit around 25th level or so they are going to start squaring off with actual divine rank beings. Deities are going to make great monsters at this level of play and it will be interesting to see how the players are regarded once they start taking out pantheons - and in doing so become a pantheon unto themselves.
These gods, as well as the "generalist" gods who represent fundamental concepts, also interact with each other, preventing them from just becoming a cavalcade of abstract, symbolic metaphor-deities. They appear in the game world and are real characters--not just one-paragraph blurbs who are assumed to be the movers-and-shakers behind the scenes through some course of divine action that no one understands or has any hope of learning. They have personal relationships with one another, and each has an appointed role in apocalyptic portents and legend. Some of them overlap in their areas of concern, but this is generally offset by the fact that overlapping gods either oppose each other, and/or use the same kind of divine influence for vastly different purposes.
In short, I think the answer is to make your deities be unique characters, and not just a worship concept followed by a list of allowed domains. Doing this, you can have as many or as few gods as you like. You'll notice Forgotten Realms giving each deity a strong history, campaign role, and personality, and the same sort of attention to detail in other books--the baatezu lords each have different interactions and personalities.
Buddhism is non theistic. It is not really a religion it's more of a philosophy. The basic teaching of Buddhism is the four noble truths explain suffering and the cause of suffering. Buddha was not a deity he was “the enlightened one.” He warned against faith and rather to base your beliefs on what you have observed.
Absolutely - as I said, Buddhism has a "monotheistic bent", not that it is monotheistic. Certainly, it is non-theistic by any western standards, though Pure Land Buddhism certainly comes to mind as one example of a school in which there are aspects of the mythology which are 'theistic', if you will.
As for the larger question of Deities in D&D. I think the concern is not with how to deal with having so many gods - certainly DMs are free to find solutions (as this thread makes evident). The concern I have is that the flavor text accompanying many of the gods indicates an agenda for and involvement with the dealings of mortals, yet the sheer number of deities (particularly the large number of chaotic/evil ones) runs counter to the concept of a vast, generally stable prime material plane. As it would seem that any deity worth their status would be causing trouble as often as possible - and with so many involved, well...
If gods are standoffish, then they exist almost purely as flavor (and an excuse to introduce more domain combinations). If they are involved, then there are implications for the world at large. And since most players, I daresay, would not be enthused by a bunch of gods sitting around their extraplanar coffee house waxing melancholy, then as more gods are introduced, their place in the world [i[necessarily[/i] takes on a more meaningful role. Otherwise you've got a heck of a lot of near-impotent deities.
I think, in the end, much like the alignment issue - but even less defendable - deities are almost pure flavor in most campaigns, and as such the proliferation of them in new books is only as important as any individual DM makes it, since fluff is so easy to change or ignore.
Granted, this removes racial deities like Moradin along with their flavour, but it also removes the overlap two LG deities provided, and Eberron-style "racialization" of deities is fair game.
Elves are their own culture, separate from human cultures - why not give them their own pantheon? The only thing wrong with "racial deities" is the implication that all nonhumans are monotheists, which seems unlikely (and yes, I know there's an elven pantheon in Races of the Wild, but not everyone seems to). Giving each culture its own set of gods helps define it and bring it to life.
Not all these deities should or can be crammed in as active participants in a storyline, of course - it's important that a DM not be an idiot and know when to cut things out - but it's important that they be available at character creation, and as the DM is planning the campaign. Rhadamanthus seems to be of the opinion that the test of good campaign design is to simplify the pantheon as much as possible. That's one route, certainly, but I don't believe it's the best one.
The amount of deities in the present edition of D&D is actually pretty small in comparison to that available in previous editions.
I use several of the PHB Deities in my campaigns, but sometimes a culture has a particular flair that is most reflected in a Deity from one of the other books. I feel this extra flexibility is only a good thing and if you don't see a purpose for some of the gods or that their powers are too similar, simply cull the ones you don't like/need from your campaign.
Also, in the same way which a specific deity can more accurately reflect a culture, the same can be said for characters. I will always be receptive to an expanding pantheon in D&D, as it simply allows for greater choice in tailoring a pantheon to your campaign, much like additional colors would allow a painter to enhance his paintings if used properly.
Deities are, in many campaigns, reflections of what's of central importance to a lot of people.
Under this logic, racial deities would arise when pride in one's race is a central part of a large group of sentient beings. So, if a race has significant racial pride (The elves are notorious for this) then a racial elven deity makes sense. If racial pride isn't a major part of the race, then it is likely there is no racial deity. Humans, for example, might see themselves as Cormyrian, or wizards, or Amazons, or whatever, before they see themselves as human. Hence, no god with a portfolio of "human," the humans are far too busy honoring a god of magic or a goddess of fighting.
Another possibility is based on the idea that deities reflect the culture that worships them. If different regions have different faiths, then the deities of the elven region would tend to represent the elves. (We are made in the gods' image OR they are made in ours, either way.) When the differing societies meet, they are inclined to keep their own gods. The end result of that wouldn't be a god with a portfolio of "Elves" or "Centaurs," but a goddess of magic that is elven, and another goddess of magic that's human. In time, since they would likely have somewhat different views, there would be some (or perhaps even lots) of cross racial worship, though the deity stays as she's always been.
Thus: The only gods I allow are the Core gods plus a few of my own custom-built powers. I also allow 4 dragon gods that can be worshipped by dragons, if a dragon's religion is ever called into question: Io and his three children. In rare cases, I allow monstrous gods for the monster races. For instance, I allow the kobolds to worship Kurtulmak because kobolds are relatively intelligent and I also allow the worship of Kurtulmak because if Kurtulmak didn't exist, Garl would be bored. I can't, say, allow a ghoul god, because ghouls are generally mindless wandering beasts. A mindless beast can't worship a god unless magically compelled, and even then, it would understand what's going on, and thus it won't really be worshipping (the rituals it performs will mean nothing and therefore are pointless).
This yields a small pantheon, which isn't too hard to deal with. Every god has a specific role and rarely do the gods conflict with each other about the same issues (Ehlonna and Obad-Hai, both nature gods, agree to leave each other alone because they have conflicting goals).
My current campaign is dragon-themed (as per the wishes of my players) and I started them in an evil dragon's demiplane, where no one knows anything about the planes and gods do not interfere directly (they just grant spells). As a result, the brainwashed population of the demiplane know only a few gods. Bahamut, Tiamat, Nimo (custom; LN), and to some extent, Fharlanghn and Io, who are less known.
As DM, it's your job to draw the line somewhere. If you think there are too many gods to choose from, then write a list of the gods that you'll allow in your campaign.
As for dealing with D&D's gods, I generally pick and chose those deities that I feel belong in my world. In some cases I combine them into aspects of the same deity (though the PCs may not know or understand this). The most important thing I do, however, is constrain which deities are worshipped in a given area. Even if a deity is known to exist in an area, they may not have a popular following to speak of. This allows me to limit the deities that have an active role in that segment of the campaign and that PCs are likely to worship. I also feel free to add to/alter/rewrite deities that are too generic to be interesting.
Handling deities is definitely a matter of personal taste. One thing I have noticed though is that the more active the deities are in the game world, the more of a headache it is to manage a lot of them. If you run a world where deities grant spells, give visions and otherwise don't directly involve themselves, having a lot of them is fine. If you run a world where deities actively muck around with mortals, manifest avatars, personally send people on quests, etc. then a lot of deities can get out of control fast, especially since you have to keep track of them all. You also have to keep wondering why there isn't a continual, obvious war of the gods going on if the gods are very active and very numerous. If the gods don't do much (at least not much that the PCs will ever notice) then having a lot of them works fine--if that's what you want. The number of deities also determines some of the feel of the world. Is this a sprawling world with lots of gods, large and small, or a more tightly constrained world with just a few or even one?
As for racial deities, they tend to remind me more of mythological heroes, which were often worshipped (Hercules and Orpheus both had sizable cults). So I just think of them that way and occasionally drop their power/change their stories a bit to reflect this.
As for racial deities, they tend to remind me more of mythological heroes, which were often worshipped (Hercules and Orpheus both had sizable cults). So I just think of them that way and occasionally drop their power/change their stories a bit to reflect this.
In fact, that's exactly what Rank 0 demigods and hero-gods are there for. Good plan--and only those races cohesive enough to HAVE a god get one, even then. (Though I consider Pelor the god of humanity, myself. He simply allows all other races to worship him too because of his solar function.)
A few posters have mentioned that throughout history, there have been countless deities. The problem with that comparison is that the deities in a D&D world have shown themselves and are undeniably real. Again, this is saying a lot, since I'm a fairly religious person (which doesn't matter). Where religion on Earth is based on faith, religion in D&D is based on loyalty to powers whose existence one cannot deny.
And this is one of the main reasons that I and many others play Eberron.
Religion in the average campaign world can't really be compared to religion on Earth. Religion in most campaign worlds involves idolizing a character who's managed to get to Ftr 20/Wiz 20, and nothing more. Religion in standard D&D isn't based on faith so much as it's based on servitude.
Religion in Eberron, like that in the real world, is completely based around faith. The only proven divinity in Eberron is the Silver Flame, but even that supposed LG force still lets evil, greedy clerics run the churches and still launches inquisitions against other beings, leaving some to doubt the true nature of the Silver Flame.
Not every race or subrace has deities. In fact many many many do not have gods and are in need of a god. I can't list them all! Start looking in your monster manual and pick the Creatures one by one and you will start to see that they lack a God to Follow.
Doresain is a very cool Concept and is a very worthy addition. I like the idea of a God of Ghouls/King of Ghouls. He is worthy. Very Worthy.
You are correct that Libris Mortis had too many death gods. A few less would probably have been more sound.
There are not too many domains. Just don't use what you don't want to use. That argument is Moot.
There are tons of Gods. How many would anyone ever use? More gods allow more room and customization for adventures. Just don't involve the gods that you don't want to use :D Very simple really. Truthfully I think that we could use a more gods. These would be more racial Oriented gods and planar oriented gods. Perhaps some expansion on the gods of Ethereal, Shadow, and Astral Creatures as well as all the racial Creatures that don't have a god already.
Have you considered the sheer number of deities that are/have been worshipped in the real world? Just looking at the Greco-roman pantheon, the Norse pantheon, and the Babylonian pantheon there are well over a hundred deities, and that's not even taking into consideration the Hindu pantheon, the Gaelic pantheon, Japanese deities, Zoroastrian deities, Egyptian Deities, African deities or the monotheistic religions that are more currently active. I don't think there are too many deities at all. The various "overlaps" allow for different cultures to have different views on archetypal concepts like life, death, love, war, etcetera.
The problem with this argument is that many of the "different" cultures that worship "different" deities derive from a common culture with a common religion and language.
Let's take, for instance, the Indo-Europeans (because they're the best documented). The various cultures of the Greeks, Romans, Celts, Tuetons, Persions, Indians, Slaves, etc. have a single (Proto Indo-European) source culture/religion/language. As the original people spread out across a wide geography, their language of each "branch" began to evolve independently from other branches, each branch put different emphasis on their gods as the adapted to different climates, environments and societal needs.
This continued to the point when the cultures, languages and religions became so dissimilar that it was immediately obvious that "Zeus" and "Tyr" are the same Pro Indo-European sky god--even though the names, worship and story behind them are radically different.
[tangent]Tyr/Tiw (using the Norse name of the common Teutonic diety) is interesting as his position of "all-father" is usurped, culturally, by Odin/Wotan (originally a death god). More so, is that the story of a one-handed sky god vs. one-eyed death god also gets played out in Irish mythology (with the names Nuada and Balor, respectively)--this time, the sky god maintains his position as chief god (after having his hand restore with a silver one--becoming the world's first cyberpunk ;) ). (Mind you, I'm over-simplifying things for the sake of brevity.)[/tangent]
On top of the common origin for each cultural "super-group," when cultures of different "super-groups" did collide, they'd typically equate their gods with the gods of the other culture. For instance, the Greeks considered the Egyptian god Thoth to be their own Hermes.
What all of this means to those DMs who create their own setting, is that it's necessary to create only a fairly small group of deities (a Core Pantheon). Different cultures have different names for them, as well as different mythologies explaining them. Some cultures may not worship certain gods at all, why other cultures may worship the same god multiple times under different names and hypostases (giving rise to different Cultural Pantheons). Racial pantheons would fall under the category of a Cultural Pantheon, in this method.
Deities of a Cultural Pantheon may not necessarily have access to all the domains that they would have as a Core Pantheon deity. Especially when the culture emphasizes only certain aspects of that deity, or in the case of a hypostasis.
Optionally, to this mix could be added a secondary Core Pantheon that represents cthonic/outsider/demonic deities that are hostile to, and seek the undoing of, the primary Core Pantheon. These could be freely added to a Cultural Pantheon as built-in enemies (think of Thurses/giants in Norse mythology or the Titans of Greek mythology).
How many HUNDREDS of gods have existed simultaneously in the various religions and mythologies of Earth? I am always baffled at the idea that even a few dozen gods in a setting is somehow "too much."
Most of them are local variations or corruptions of one another. Not so in RPGs, usually. Though Glorantha is an exception.
Just because there are a hundred gods does not mean your players are going to be concerned about them.
Vern
On top of the common origin for each cultural "super-group," when cultures of different "super-groups" did collide, they'd typically equate their gods with the gods of the other culture. For instance, the Greeks considered the Egyptian god Thoth to be their own Hermes.
Bright day, Wasn't this only true of Greeks? AFAIK Afro-Asiats were content with "other people's god\s"
Okay on topic. Well I think you have too many gods only if you consider every each of them God. This is something that certain philosophers pointed out thousands years in the past already. I take gods as powerful critters, powerful otherplanar critters so you cannot just run sword through them and kill them. I solve the problem of PCs challenging entire pantheons by not having stupid and lazy gods. If PCs ever get powerful to be almost a threat, gods will show up, and it depends only on PCs if with Hammer of Divine Smite +n or u-haul kit to help players move to Olympia. So I can get away with any number of them. Domains of course are different. And those I restrict to core.
In my opinion, the assumed surfeit of deities is easily accommodated by encouraging a depth of culture in the world you're building, making sure various countries have their own mythologies and beliefs, and assigning the various deities where they best fit. If you're worried about all these divine beings overpopulating the planes, that's also easily remedied--give some gods multiple names and facets.
I believe this is similar to our monotheistic religions now. I'm not trying to start a religion war but if you read the Koran, Catholic bible, Protestant bible, Jewish bible they all read very similarly just with different nouns.
The core/Greyhawk pantheon has been created backwards in many regards. What I mean is, the gods were created from a metagame mechanical requirement first (alignment/class/race/domain) rather than from fitting domains and powers to concepts.
So, instead of the situation in real-world religion (say, Greek mythology), where it is a case of 'here's your list of gods, pick one!', we get 'I'm a [insert whatever here], so I should probably worship [insert thingy here]'. And whenever a new domain is cooked up, it gets assigned to a new deity.
This might not be a problem, but the gods are also rather isolated (and I feel, a bit flat, especially in 3.5). Unlike real-world pantheons, the core pantheon has very little inter-relationships between the deites (other than in very basic terms, between obvious friends and enemies), and as such the newer gods come out rather flat and artificial.
The game worlds with more concrete history do not seem to suffer from this problem; Faerun's pantheon seems a little better, despite the enormous numbers of gods as they have a history and seem more characterised. I can't speak for many other settings (I only know about Faerun because one of our DMs runs a game there and I looked through the books), but I assume that they are more organic, less mechanical.
The core-rules divinities would be better off, I think, by being developed more individually and as a group (perhaps, instead of adding new deities to accommodate new domains, expanding the number of domains available to the older gods).
The problem with this argument is that many of the "different" cultures that worship "different" deities derive from a common culture with a common religion and language.
Ok, let's take a step back. The OP began his discussion with a scope: the core rules. The core rules are based on Greyhawk, and Greyhawk has several pantheons, many of which provide deities which are among the core gods of 3.5 D&D.
So... if we're going to try to understand the social implications of core deities, we have to look at the source, and understand why these deities are the way they are.
I think that the Greyhawk gods in the core don't make much sense in a vacuum, and so I partially agree with the OP, but I think the solution is to run an actual GREYHAWK game, not further emasculate the pantheons.
In any world where the gods objectively exist and take an active part in everyday life (or grant divine magic) you have to assume from a good storytelling perspective that religion as we know it would not exist, but fervent dedication to the gods in all walks of life would most certainly exist. Knowing that there is, for absolute certain, a god of the ocean, can you really imagine not seeking out a priest of that god before you travel by sea? You'd have to be insane!
Really the problem is not with the number of gods, just with the way that they are handled in D&D. For a world with such varied mythology, it shocks me to what extent the world seems to be atheistic, or at least agnostic. I suppose there is some merit to the argument that there are just so damn many gods that people prefer to just ignore the whole shebang. Of course, if NPCs in the world ignore all that crap, why should we as DMs care?
If you are not a holy man of some kind, in standard D&D, you most likely give only lip service to the gods. Realistically it seems like the entire society of all humanoid cultures would be deeply and fully dedicated to their gods.
As another example of the kind of problem this causes, look at crime. Frequently in the Middle Ages, crime was mostly controlled by the threat of hellfire and brimstone. If there are real gods who can be spoken to directly, how can anyone ever betray their god, knowing that punishment is coming, without a doubt?
To make a world with so many active deities seem and feel real, you would have to essentially reimagine the entire concept of D&D society to incorporate it, rather than the standard answer of treating them like Greek Mythology.
For example, a LG god has the domains Law, Good, Sun, and Strength. In addition to being known by different titles, he could also have multiple churches based on his domains (Law/Sun, Law/Strength, Good/Sun, Good/Strength, Law/Good, and Sun/Strength). Each one would firmly and sometimes fanatically believe that their god was not the others' god. In the case of the pure Law/Good religion, they would probably worship other LG deities since it's unlikely that they would reject the same alignment.
In this way, you could generalize the specific (non-alignment-based) domains as you saw fit. That way, a fairly small pantheon of nine deities could be broadened into a multitude of religions:
LG Deity (Law, Good, Sun, Strength)
Law/Good
Law/Strength
Law/Sun
Good/Strength
Good/Sun
Sun/Strength
NG Deity (Good, Healing, Community[DLCS], Protection)
Healing/Good
Healing/Community
Healing/Protection
Community/Good
Community/Protection
Good/Protection
CG Deity (Chaos, Good, Luck, Trickery)
[6 Religions]
LN Deity (Law, Protection, Community, Knowledge)
[6 Religions]
N Deity (Animal, Plant, Sun, Earth)
[6 Religions]
CN Deity (Chaos, Trickery, Water, Air)
[6 Religions]
LE Deity (Law, Evil, War, Strength)
[6 Religions]
NE Deity (Evil, Death, Knowledge, Trickery)
[6 Religions]
CE Deity (Chaos, Evil, Fire, Destruction)
[6 Religions]
And then you have 54 base religions. Even when some of a particular deity's churches have closely related views (in let's say 4 cases) that's still 50 religions from just 9 gods. Of course, you then need to make up details for those churches... :P
A limited pantheon of gods, worshipped by pretty much everyone, although often under different names. I'm even more fond of the idea of gods having unclear 'alignment' definitions. Some worshippers of the lady of death might be nihilists who run around and kill people. Others might preside over funerary rites and help to keep their villages free from plague and undead. One worshipper of the lady of fate might be a happy go-lucky gambling rogue whose forever on the road (one step ahead of angry fathers, creditors and annoyed co-religionists of a more stuffy bent). Another might be a dark elf who sees her as a spider in the center of a web of predestination, binding the fates of all, so that they dance to her mad whims. Same goddess. Same portfolio. One calls her Tymora, the other Lolth, others are strict and curmudgeonly, with rules and rites for every little thing, and call her Istus. The 'lady' herself? Neither. Both. Not really definable in terms such as 'alignment' anyway.
I get that the real-world has religions with thousands of gods. But I don't really want to be blowing money on that sort of supplement, when I could just read the Bhagavad-Gita and get a real education. Plus the real world has a lot of gods that are basically the same thing anyway. The sky-father. The powerful son. The kind mother. The sly trickster. They're archetypes, and having a dozen of the same god, one worshipped by short bearded people, another by pointy-eared people, and another worshipped by people with dark skin just seems silly, to me.
I particularly dislike the notion of racial gods. If some cosmically powerful thing exists, why is it going to refuse worship from Dwarves, and prefer Elves? Why not appear as the elven god of craftsmanship, art and beauty to the elves, under some long flowery name, and a stumpy sook-blackened god of the forge and metalwork to dwarves?
Do elves, dwarves, humans, humans from country x, humans from country y, dark elves, aquatic elves, elves with wings on their backs, elves with furry cat-hides and elves with pink ribbons in their hair all need their own personal 'Goddess of Magic?' What's the point of any of them even claiming to be 'the' Goddess of Magic when they are one of a dozen?
It, IMO, cheapens the whole idea of divinity. In the real-world it worked fine, because no matter if your sky-father was Zeus, Odin, Ukko, Indra or Susano-o, he wasn't answering your prayers anyway... If Zeus, Odin, etc. all existed, and were fighting for worshippers, they'd spend half their time trying to kill each other, and their worshippers wouldn't get any spells anyway, since the gods wouldn't have any power to spare, being constantly struggling for every scrap of power with the dozen other gods who claim the exact same portfolio and are trying to seize that power for themselves!
Add IMO, MMV, etc. to the end of every sentence. I'm certainly not gonna turn down a game because the GM wants to use a huge pantheon. If anything, a huge pantheon just increases the chances of my finding Domains and Favored Weapons that help me to min-max a more powerful Cleric.
The more gods, the more choices, the better. D&D's metaverse is HUGE, with TRILLION of beings... And so, there should be a batcrap amount of gods running around. Simple logic.
I don't know if anyone said this before, but why not use a variation on the Dragonlance method (that different cultures have different names for the same deity) and tie it into domains (which I agree are way too many)?
For example, a LG god has the domains Law, Good, Sun, and Strength. In addition to being known by different titles, he could also have multiple churches based on his domains (Law/Sun, Law/Strength, Good/Sun, Good/Strength, Law/Good, and Sun/Strength). Each one would firmly and sometimes fanatically believe that their god was not the others' god. In the case of the pure Law/Good religion, they would probably worship other LG deities since it's unlikely that they would reject the same alignment.
Well, a god always provides his alignment domains. That aside, though, wouldn't it be simpler to just say that several cultures have a LG Sun god, and call him different things? This is one of the reasons I like Eberron's gods -- even the dragons use the same gods, just see them differently.
That's not really true, The Romans were famous for incorporating the gods of civilizations the conquered into their own pantheon and often did what someone suggested, namely taking gods that served the same function and ran with the same theme and say that they worshiped the same god but just call them by other names, for a variety of reasons. The reason being that it makes it a bit easier to control a recently conquered people and also because the Romans had a very different view of religion then we do. They worshiped gods for two reasons, first to keep off the gods smite lists and second for what the gods could do for them. After all the more gods you have on your side the better.
Fantasy races aren't just species or cultures. They're, for lack of a better term, adolescent gangs. "Huh?" you're probably thinking. Yup, that's right, adolescent gangs. See, members of the same species can interbreed (check!), and people in a culture share certain ideas, prejudices, worldviews, but fantasy races go way further than that. They actually have defined personality types that almost all members of the race share. Dwarves are greedy, gnomes are creative pranksters, drow are bitter, &c., &c. (I believe the Burning Wheel RPG spelled these out explicitly at some point by giving each race its own special stat.) Anyway, the reason they work this way is that it makes it easier to have characters that fit a certain personality archetype, particularly a negative one. Other folks at the gaming table will accept the kleptomaniac kender a lot more easily than they'll accept the kleptomaniac human, often. This is because having certain traits, especially negative traits, hard-wired into your race makes those traits a lot more accessible and justifiable when you're making a character.
But, at any rate, this means that it does make sense for there to be a deity that specifically represents what the race stands for. And there are: Corellon, Gruumsh, Lolth, &c. all strongly reflect the psychology of their followers (which, as said above, is much more homogenized than real human culture in pretty much every way).
So, yeah, the racial deities definitely do make a fair amount of sense, as far as the whole system is concerned. I feel like I should say something about changing the whole system, but that's a whole 'nother thread...