The World of Avlis

I'm a new player of Avlis, and I couldn't find a list anywhere of acceptable domains for the deities. I found the dieties list, just not a list of which domains would be acceptable.

Is this up to the player to decide, or am I missing something?

Thanks for asking that.
I have been meaning to ask that exact thing for a while now and I keep on forgetting.


~waits for a real answer~

I would think its up to commone sense...

I mean, think about it. O'ma- Good, and healing are probably best. Maybe some of the nature related ones.

Gorethar- War (battle?), Good.

Maleki- Evil, Fire (is that even a domain)?

etc.

as far as I know, there has never been a written list of appropriate domains for a particular diety in Avlis.

I do think though, that there are some pretty obvious coorelations between some of the major dieties and the domains. For example, Dru'El would probably be best served using the Plant Domain along with either the Animal or Earth domain. Just my personal opinion though, nothing more.

The only posts in the Cleric's forum have said that it is largely up to the player and to common sense. To be honest, I'd like to see a few more domains and the domains done a bit better before we start assigning them to dieties, but this of course is at Bioware's end of the problem.

Most important info here:

- There was a discussion about that on the cleric discussion boards. It would probably help to read that, you'll have to join the cleric's usergroup to gain access (use the usergroups tab under the banner on the top of this page)

- The main conclusion was that we don't feel up to confining the choices thusly. Use common sense and the god's descriptions on our main website and also the more in depth descriptions provided on the clerics boards to decide.

It is probably the most important part of playing a cleric to pick your diety, and from that should come your choice of domains. Just like in the Players Handbook there should be a restriction.

Allowing freedom of choice, just allows metagaming. I am more than willing to put the effort into making up a list of domains for the listed dieties which you can modify at will. That would result in most dieties having 4-6 possible domains.

As I have already had one run in with a cleric of Dru'El who had the domain "Evil"...common sense is anything but common.

Spell Singer wrote:
As I have already had one run in with a cleric of Dru'El who had the domain "Evil"...common sense is anything but common.

or someone didn't read the world information. Low levels of course should remake with next to no lost effort.

I kind of have to agree with Spell Singer on the issue of Domains. Some days I wonder if I'm the only Cleric on Avlis who can't cast Stoneskin. ON the other hand, with the number of goods, I 'd like to see a few more domains and a bit more balancing with the domains we have. Too bad Bioware won't get on this one. URG!

Vergilius wrote: I kind of have to agree with Spell Singer on the issue of Domains. Some days I wonder if I'm the only Cleric on Avlis who can't cast Stoneskin. ON the other hand, with the number of goods, I 'd like to see a few more domains and a bit more balancing with the domains we have. Too bad Bioware won't get on this one. URG!

<Mini-hijack on>

I'm not familar at all with domains. Are they a 3e thing, or is it something Bioware threw in?

<Mini-hijack off>

Dirk Cutlass wrote:Mini-hijack on>

I'm not familar at all with domains. Are they a 3e thing, or is it something Bioware threw in?

<Mini-hijack off>

A little of both. Domains exist in 3e, and are fleshed out quite nicely, howver bioware didn't impliment them all and they way they do them isnt' exactly kosher.



~S

domains need to be like 3rd edition, 1 spells for each level. because of the weak implementation bioware really messed up domains and usage in NWN.

ashzz

the idea of Domains is part of 3rd edition rules. Bioware continued the tradition but apparently "adjusted" them for online play. I'm not advocating going back to the old system, but I would like to see some adjustments before we go assigning domains to deities. *again, to my knowledge adjusting domains is a bioproblem, not sure what the team can actually do anything about it*

I'll to explain 3rd ed. rules first.

clerics pick 2 domains, these domains are tied to the diety. Dieties generally have 2-4 domains so you have some choice in the matter, but generally choices limit you greatly. You can't power pick these 2 best combos to get mr. uber cleric, at least not with the player's handbook dieties. Out of the two domains, you get domain spells, 1 per level. The spell list is printed at something like 2+1, 5+1, with the +1 meaning the domain spell. Clerics received a domain slot in which they HAD to memorize a domain spell. Usually these were worht while, so there was no problem. However, you got 2 domain spells and 1 spell slot per level. Additionally, the domains had some special power attatched, like they do in NWN.



NWN implementation has a domain power, often adjusted from PNP or changed entirely. (not entirely a bad thing since the balance of a PNP contest is different from that of computer world) The domain spells are not nearly as extensive. It is more of a bonus spell thing and thus you get fewer of them. I think Magic gives the most spells but also has no extra domain ability. thus, the Domains give 2-5 bonus spells in total in lieu of the domain spells/slots. These new domain spells can be memorized but don't have to be memorized. So on the surface, it looks like NWN is wimpier than PNP, you get fewer spells right? The problem is the deity alignment/domain correspondance was a check against breaking the system.


What we have right now is domains that give stoneskin are very well represented while some other domains are virtually non-existent. Mages will immediately recognize the value of stoneskin, stack it on a cleric and you have a character that solos extraodinarily well. Should it be removed? Not hardly, because there were several domains that gave stoneskin in PNP. But then harkening to another thread, PNP was a cooperative game whereas NWN is certainly more threatened at becoming a solo fest.

What that leaves is balancing things out where the domains that confer nice abilities get spread out among various dieties and don't stack up all on the same dieties. Of course, we'll still see around 50% of the clerics walking around with stoneskin, simply because several domains confer the ability. But at least we won't see say, some 90% of the Clerics that I've seen since May.

Of course all the domains confer something good upon the Cleric, something that allows him/her to specialize and diversify and keeps the whole playing experience different every time you play a cleric. and Indeed, stoneskin itself is not broken, just its practicality and usefulness is so extensive that a lot players feel compelled to take a domain that offers it in lieu of stuff like water or fire, which can both be good in their own right, but aren't nearly as practical. Since there are 4 domains, it is fairly easy to invent a plausible reason why it is IC for the character to have that domain and thus have access to that spell.


On the issue of the number of domains, NWN has 19 of the 22 in the Player's handbook, so perhaps I mispoke earlier about "adding" domains. That still leaves 2 things: Making the domains a bit more level so people would actually want to take them evently. and assigning those domains to dieties to cut down on over-metaing the classes.


I think he balancing has to come first, and as anyone can see. Compared with 3e, a lot of people are dissatisfied with the way the domains were done. After balancing, we could maybe stand for a fair and equal distrubution of domains across the various gods.

Another issue with the domains is there is no way to check this on character creation, which is most likely why they won't ever be assigned. There are just enough people out there that are either too eager to play and skip the world info or are just too lazy to read this kind of information and DMs have better things to do than tell new Clerics they have to remake because their domains don't match the god they serve in the world info.

However, to head off such issues as Spell Singer reported, would it be possible to draw up a bit of a broader document entitled: "Suggested domains per diety". This would not be "rule" per se, but it would at least give a guide to those such as the above poster who was kind enough to read the rules and then ask his question on these forums. Additionally, for any lacking common sense, they'd have an extra check before they run into the game with something a bit contradictory.

well, more than my 2cents worth, somebody else take up the ball and roll with it.

verg~

Spell Singer wrote:
As I have already had one run in with a cleric of Dru'El who had the domain "Evil"...common sense is anything but common.

There will always be those that lack in common sense unfortunately. Dru'El with evil domain just don't match, everyone should be able to figure that out, there are other obvious examples of what's wrong.
The problem lies in that it is not so black and white for every god-domain combo. If you feel up to it, maybe you can propose a list of gods with their domains.
If Orleron feels it is up to standards, he might make it official. Count on this to happen after SoU though, this conversion project will keep him quite busy for a few weeks to come.

Vergilius wrote: I kind of have to agree with Spell Singer on the issue of Domains. Some days I wonder if I'm the only Cleric on Avlis who can't cast Stoneskin. ON the other hand, with the number of goods, I 'd like to see a few more domains and a bit more balancing with the domains we have. Too bad Bioware won't get on this one. URG!

My cleric can't cast stoneskin. I felt there were plenty of those around. As a consequence he might not be as hard in combat, but that never bothered me at all.

I also think more domains, while being good (diversity is almost always good), are not the answer.
The 3rd edition has a nice and balanced domains system, it's more the way Bioware implemented them. It's exactly like Ashzz put it here:

Ashzz wrote:domains need to be like 3rd edition, 1 spells for each level. because of the weak implementation bioware really messed up domains and usage in NWN.

Sindol wrote: The problem lies in that it is not so black and white for every god-domain combo. If you feel up to it, maybe you can propose a list of gods with their domains.
If Orleron feels it is up to standards, he might make it official. Count on this to happen after SoU though, this conversion project will keep him quite busy for a few weeks to come.

You can modify the listing to your hearts content of course (easier to do that then generate it yourself) since I will have to guess for some of the dieties and I am sure I will be guessing wrong. Trust me "magic" would never have been a domain for Gorethar.

And as I said most gods would have 4-6 domains that make sense and I would probably include a small number (in some cases) of minor domains.

EX: (domains are listed alphabetically)

Gorethar: Major Domains: Good, Protection, Strength, War
Minor Domains: Earth, Magic

I am willing to do the work if the team wishes me to, just let me know. But I would rather not have a statement that is all ifs, maybes, and mights ...

Spell Singer wrote: I am willing to do the work if the team wishes me to, just let me know. But I would rather not have a statement that is all ifs, maybes, and mights ...

I understand. Personally I think it would be a nice idea, but I will have to ask permission from the boss to make this part of the official Avlis rules. I will get back to you personally once I'm in the clear about it myself.

Sindol wrote:

Vergilius wrote: I kind of have to agree with Spell Singer on the issue of Domains. Some days I wonder if I'm the only Cleric on Avlis who can't cast Stoneskin. ON the other hand, with the number of goods, I 'd like to see a few more domains and a bit more balancing with the domains we have. Too bad Bioware won't get on this one. URG!

My cleric can't cast stoneskin. I felt there were plenty of those around. As a consequence he might not be as hard in combat, but that never bothered me at all.

I also think more domains, while being good (diversity is almost always good), are not the answer.
The 3rd edition has a nice and balanced domains system, it's more the way Bioware implemented them. It's exactly like Ashzz put it here:

I'm guessing you were typing your post before my really long way and so it got submitted afterwards. Anyway, the long and short of the post was that I admitted that more domains might not help much (19NWN vs 22 PHP), but fixing domains back up with balancing would offer a lot to the game.

So I think that puts all of us in general agreement.

verg~

Spell Singer wrote:As I have already had one run in with a cleric of Dru'El who had the domain "Evil"...common sense is anything but common.

(EDIT)

I believe I know the character in question. She chose her domains based in part on her heritage (before the "cheesing rules" were clearly implemented, she made this character a half-fiend).

Dru'El's domains would IMO be Animal & Plant (Earth, Good, Healing as alternates). I cannot imagine any reason why Dru'El (or any of the Good gods) would grant Evil domain powers.

- Aloro

Adding to the suggestions, perhaps we can build a list here.

Maleki being evil gets the evil domain. War and destruction are for slaughter. He prides strength so that wraps up the majors.

For minors, Maleki is the diety of diease. Plant is the closest with 'creeping doom' and the control on vermin. Wise malekites survive other means then the strength his giants are famous for. Trickery is that 'subtle' evil that gives the wise malekite his/her edge.

Maleki: Major Domains: Destruction, Evil, Strength, War
Minor Domains: Plant, Trickery

If you can all build a list here that's fine. But the final word by Orleron is that it will not be officially sanctioned, because there is no way to enforce this accurately. I was afraid that was coming, but I had to try.

Sindol wrote:because there is no way to enforce this accurately..

This was one of the conclusions of my excessively long post above. Guys lets go ahead and make suggestions and comments because these comments WILL exist for others as constructive help when they make Clerics in the future. I myself will think of some things and post a list up in a few days depending upon the kind of content we get here. For the list not to be officially sanctioned does not make it somehow a bad or useless idea, just that it has no offical power over anyone.


A though that has occurred to me is to suggest 4 domains for the major gods plus the 2 minor as of present. Then for the lesser, minor, dieites, pick just the 4 domains. The lesser dieties shoudl be much easier to select domains for since they presede over specific spheres of influence and the domains tie much more closely in with them, at least IMHO.

As for what I've read so far, things look generally good with the Gorethar and Maleki.

verg~

Berryn: Springtime & Morning (Renewal & Beginings)

Possible Domains: Animal, Plant, Earth, or Healing


Animal, Plant or Earth correspond well with the physical nature of Springtime. Healing fits well with the concept of Renewal.

The Sun domain would literally fit well with Morning, but I really don't see Berryn as being that concerned with undead so the powers of Sun wouldn't fit well.

Spell Singer wrote:I am willing to do the work if the team wishes me to, just let me know. But I would rather not have a statement that is all ifs, maybes, and mights ...

I think this is a good idea, irrespective of its enforcability in the game. If a decent set of guidelines and suggestions (just that - no firm rules) can be put together and the world owners can "sprinkle their holy water on it" then, even if only half of new clerics read it and use it there will be some good effects.

for that matter you could call them rules (that might entice more that read them to use them) even if they are unenforcable.

Vichan Lyonsen wrote: for that matter you could call them rules (that might entice more that read them to use them) even if they are unenforcable.

No, that won't work. If we call something rules, that means we expect you to follow them and we're willing to back them up and will enforce them. If we start making rules that we don't plan to enforce, we will only succeed in creating chaos.

Again: I would still love to see this in a guide-like form, but it will not be made official part of the Avlis dogma and rules.

the point is that in the end I would have to guess or make things optional for some deities where I am not sure as in:

Godlet X-upsolon Major Domains: Sun(?), Surf(?), and Sand.

Orl would then have to look at this Godlet and say hmmm Sun is ok, Surf is not or whatever. As there is no interest in doing this then it is not worth it to me to invest the time to make the listing in the first place since the effort would go straight to the circular file.

As we say in my field... "The theory was good, but it worked like spit in practice."

Spell Singer wrote: Orl would then have to look at this Godlet and say hmmm Sun is ok, Surf is not or whatever. As there is no interest in doing this then it is not worth it to me to invest the time to make the listing in the first place since the effort would go straight to the circular file.

The point is that is crazy town at the moment up at the high end. The guys are working hard to make the SoU thing go down as quietly as possible. Orleron would just have no time for that at the moment.

Spell Singer wrote: As we say in my field... "The theory was good, but it worked like spit in practice."

Sadly, yes. Maybe I will think up such a list myself based on the website and boards info here and there and run it by Orleron for posting once they are less busy. Whether or not that ever comes to happen, the point remains: no rules, just friendly advice.