Template talk:Deity

Worshiper vs. Cleric alignments
The template now contains a line "cleric alignments", but it displays (and says in the explanation) "Worshipers alignemnts". Which one is really meant? Faiths and Pantheons only talks about clerics alignments, so maybe that's where that comes from, but Faiths & Avatars gives distinct cleric and worshiper alignments (and even still different specialty priests alignment(s)). By the way, thanks a lot for including the primordials now! Daranios (talk) 13:10, January 18, 2017 (UTC)


 * See Forum:Organizing the Deity template. I believe the label was changed to the more general term to match the "Worshipers" field but the parameter name was kept for backward compatibility. I suppose I could run the bot over all the Deities and change the parameter names, but worshiper alignments5e is so damn long :-P. &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 14:55, January 18, 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the link! The Forum thread leaves me slightly in the dark, though, as you talked a lot about clerics alignments there, but ended up with "worshiper alignments". Not wanting to complain or anything, but are there worshiper alignments given anywhere outside 2nd edition? Daranios (talk) 15:40, January 18, 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure if other editions have worshiper alignments in addition to cleric alignments. We went with the more general term to be inclusive. If all you have is cleric alignments, then just put those in. Discrepancies should always be explained in the text or in a note. If you have other ideas, reopen that Forum thread :) &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 22:36, January 18, 2017 (UTC)


 * :) Yeah, actually I couldn't resist and posed the question to the general public. Daranios (talk) 21:08, January 19, 2017 (UTC)

5e fields
Some of the 5e-specific fields in the infobox that have been ported from 4e are not used: dominion5e, sphere5e, and channel divinity5e do not have any 5th-edition meaning.

On the other hand, there are portfolios and home planes associated with 5e deities, so fields like portfolio5e and homeplane5e could be inserted. Thoughts? &mdash; Sirwhiteout (talk) 20:39, December 4, 2017 (UTC)


 * Yeah, when I added those fields I thought that 5th edition would follow the 4th edition rules, but that turned out to be completely wrong. I can rename dominion5e to be homeplane5e and sphere5e to be portfolio5e. I will check on channel divinity, because I swear I saw that in a 5e source somewhere. Are there any more that don't fit what we know about 5e? &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 22:13, December 4, 2017 (UTC)


 * There are channel divinity powers in 5e (they're called "effects", not "prayers", p. 58 of the PHB), but they're directly linked to clerical domains and paladin oaths, not to individual deities like in 4e. So I guess it could be kept, but I'm not sure if it would be informative. Moreover, p. 18 of Xanathar's Guide to Everything discusses clerics that do not follow any deity in particular and are still granted channel divinity effects. As for other fields: power5e is not formally mentioned for most deities (and when it is, it's mostly en passant), but that doesn't mean it won't ever; also, there is no cleric alignment restriction in 5e, so cleric alignments5e is not relevant. &mdash; Sirwhiteout (talk) 22:58, December 4, 2017 (UTC)


 * I disagree about the Channel Divinity powers not being linked to individual deities in 5e. The Knowledge domain grants two Channel Divinity powers, Knowledge of the ages and Read thoughts, and specifically calls out Oghma, Gond, and Moradin as being examples of deities that grant this domain. I think we can keep the Channel Divinity parameter and just remove "prayer" from the label. How does that sound? &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 01:32, December 5, 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, and for cleric alignments, how about I just change the documentation to say that this is for "typical" followers of the deity in 5e, rather than restrictions? &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 01:34, December 5, 2017 (UTC)


 * Yeah, coming to think about it, I guess it would be informative to keep the Channel Divinity powers mentioned as well as the domain for each deity. As for the Channel Divinity parameter, I agree with that choice, since "effect" is more of a game term. I also like calling them "typical" alignments: that goes quite well with the spirit of 5e. In short, both choices sound great! &mdash; Sirwhiteout (talk) 02:23, December 5, 2017 (UTC)