Varying Religious Culture in TTRPGs and Worldbuilding

The focus on bone magic that has dominated the blog for the past three weeks has made me start to think more about how we treat religion in D&D and other TTRPGs. Because of the "real" nature of the gods, who go around and directly intervene in mortal affairs by endowing certain clerics and paladins with the ability to cast spells, we often focus solely on the gods and less on the churches that spring up in their name. We allow religious monoliths for our various deities, because, after all, wouldn't a god smite a heretical church?

Heresy was something seen as critically relevant in the medieval era. In fact, one medieval Pope described "the followers of heresy" as "more evil" than non-Christians, like Pagans and Muslims, because heretics would corrupt and destroy the church. Therefore, when building a medieval-esque fantasy world, we would be missing out on a key element if we ignored the threat and fear that existed around concepts of heresy. We just need to find a way to build that in without it being something that would directly draw tangible divine wrath.

That protection from divine wrath often comes from an "enemy god" protecting someone from being smited. To do this, we often position "good" pantheon monoliths against "evil" ones. This creates a stark binary between, say, the forces of the sun god and the forces of Asmodeus who rules the hells. Because of the positioning of some gods as evil, civilized society shuns their followers, leading to classic adventures where the party goes to smash some cult that is hoping to gain power by doing nefarious deeds for a dark god. Yet this too ignores some of the rich cultural interplay at work between religious groups during the Middle Ages, and by fleshing out less morally absolute positions for our gods, we can draw from some of this richness.

The Historical Gap

Monolithic Pantheons

One of the big issues with developing a more "accurate" sort of religious context in our worldbuilding is that even polytheistic pantheons in fantasy typically draw their influence from centralized, monotheistic churches. It represents polytheism more as a medieval Catholic would view the different saints, rather than as distinct religious entities.

Stereotypical fantasy has some sort of central, predominant religion. In Game of Thrones, the Faith of the Seven dominates most of Westeros outside of a few exceptions. In Dragon Age, all of the human realms except for Tevinter follow the Chantry (dwarves and elves have their own faiths). In The Witcher, the Eternal Fire is pretty much the sole religion that we encounter. And while D&D's Forgotten Realms campaign setting has a truly staggering number of deities and religious organizations, because of their sheer number, most DMs that I have played with who use the Forgotten Realms tend to let all of them mostly blend together in a sort of polytheistic, mostly organized pseudo-Christian sort of faith. Similarly, in the Exandria campaign setting created by the D&D Actual Play group Critical Role, there is a generally good-aligned pantheon (the "Prime Deities") and a generally evil-aligned pantheon (the "Betrayer Gods"), with the worship of any of the Prime Deities being accepted.

This sort of religious unity is a stand-in for the role of Catholicism in England during the medieval period, which is where a lot of these fantasy works draw their inspiration. The Catholic Church was unquestionably important to medieval life. A village priest might have been the only true center of power other than a noble and played a crucial role in promoting or encouraging resistance to more secular leadership.

The Chantry, the Church of the Eternal Fire, and the Faith of the Seven all clearly demonstrate the influence of medieval Christianity. These faiths are monotheistic for the most part (the Seven are technically seven aspects of a greater divine power--as the Holy Trinity is used to represent three aspects of the Christian God), are centralized and organized churches with mostly standard church rites, and have a central Pope-like leader for the church. The parallels are intentionally obvious.

D&D and its mish-mash of polytheism is a little less overt in its influence, but the influence is there nevertheless. Different regions may worship any particular god of the pantheon; for example, a port city may be dominated by the church of whichever pantheon member is God of the Sea. Yet this is far more like the way in which different patron saints were used in the medieval world rather than something non-Catholic. A single medieval town might have a patron saint, the local church dedicated to that saint, and the majority of prayers might be offered up to that saint. Yet other saints could still be respected, with veneration of them not deemed evil or heretical, just as a D&D god in the "good" pantheon would be. Just as a D&D character in the Forgotten Realms might say a prayer to Tymora for luck and follow it up with a prayer to Valkur for safe passage aboard a ship, a Catholic might say a prayer to Saint Cajetan, patron saint of good luck, and then Saint Nicholas, patron saint of sailors. Followers of another "good" deity are not seen as the same insidious, corrupting role as a medieval heretic would be.

The Role of "Evil Gods"

Where religious conflict does exist in these fantasy worlds, it is most typically portrayed as a conflict between the "good" pantheon and the "evil" pantheon. Take Critical Role's Exandria campaign setting, with its good "Prime Gods" and its evil "Betrayer Gods." Following one of the evil "betrayers" makes one evil. No member of any of the three Critical Role campaign parties is a follower of a Betrayer god; rather, the Betrayer Gods are supporters of antagonists.

We might think that the Betrayer Gods are meant to fill the historical niche of non-Christians if the Prime Gods are our stand-ins for medieval Catholics and their various saints. However, this is a vast simplification of the way that real non-Christians interacted with medieval Christians.

Particularly outside of England and France, where fantasy often draws from, religion was often a very different subject. While the ruling class was typically Catholic by the middle of the medieval period, significant religious minority groups existed and were often respected.

For example, near the Christian kingdoms of Castile-Leon and Aragon (all parts of modern-day Spain), there were large numbers of Muslim kingdoms in the south, which meant that many Muslims lived within the borders of Spanish kingdoms. Many of the Muslim-ruled kingdoms in the south would ally themselves with Castilian or Aragonese Christian rulers for protection from other, expansionary Muslim powers. Their political independence was more important than some sort of religious distinction, and Muslims in these territories were allowed to continue their practice of Islam. In Sicily, Muslims were likewise respected and even earned important court positions in the inner circle of Christian kings.

Similarly, in the Scandinavian kingdoms, there was a large pagan minority. The tolerance for pagan magic marked a surprisingly tolerant attitude towards this minority. While in England, heretics and witches were being burned at the stake, in Scandinavia, magic was practiced and seemingly respected as a continuation of traditional pagan practices.

Of course, adapting this to fantasy only works if the "evil gods" of our other pantheon are not so completely evil that no one would ever follow them except for evil reasons. But that's the subject of a whole second post. For now, the advice is just that by having distinct divine entities who may strongly oppose one another, we can break the mold of all our various deities feeling more like saints than distinct religions.

One piece of genre fiction that does this well is A Song of Ice & Fire by George R.R. Martin. The representation of the Old Gods, who are still venerated in the North, fits this model well. They are not evil; they're just different. Followers of the Old Gods are a different cultural group, but they can live in peace with followers of the Seven.

Religion as "The Other"

One thing that historians talk a lot about is the process of "othering" – labeling some group as something distinctly different. This often leads to discrimination, as once a group is positioned as an other, the creation of an us vs them mentality is very easy to fall into.

Even in our more religiously tolerant societies, such as medieval Spain, religion was a dividing line for this process of othering. The language used in medieval texts marked religion as a defining characteristic in formulating a group. Muslims living in Christian Iberia would regularly refer to "the Christian king" as a force distinct from "us" (meaning the Muslim population). The Jewish population of many European realms was isolated, and, even when specifically protected by law, seen as a distinct people who married within their own communities and had a different culture.

Just as we do not see religious difference-yet-tolerance in a lot of classic fantasy because of good-vs-evil divine natures, we also rarely see religious "others" except when those people are either evil or are a different species/race/lineage/whatever term your preferred RPG uses. Followers of some other "good" deity are accepted fully, as one might accept someone with a different patron saint. Cultists of Asmodeus are seen as other because they are evil and are consequently ostracized, as we have already discussed. Elves or dwarves may have their own entire pantheon and be marked as culturally different, but in that case, the elvish population also typically lives physically separate. They have their own kingdoms that practice the elvish religion, rather than being integrated and yet distinctive as religious "others" were in Spain.

Again, taking a look at some of our examples from the fantasy genre, we can see inklings of this done well in Game of Thrones / A Song of Ice & Fire. The people of the North do have different cultural traditions marking them as "other," they do live in the same political apparatus as the people of the South and so are not wholly isolated, and yet their religious practices are entirely permitted.

Another example that somewhat deals with what I'm talking about is Dragon Age. The Elves of Dragon Age are second-class citizens in Ferelden – they are a distinctly "other" group. They often follow their own traditional religion and have their own gods that are distinct from the Catholic stand-in Church of Andraste. However, they aren't engaging with the complex historical "other-yet-tolerated" position; that still is a void in the world's historical parallel. They are otherized, and yet they are not allowed to practice their faith, and so those that do, do so underground. This isn't a bad representation--I think that the treatment of elves is one of the interesting cultural elements of Dragon Age--but it isn't the sort of middle-ground position that is so fascinating and often overlooked.

Summary

In short, we see religious others who are ostracized and repressed. In some worlds, that is the treatment of followers of "evil gods." In others, a more nuanced stance is taken where a culturally distinct group is being repressed. We also see religious toleration, particularly in polytheistic worlds. But in these worlds, there is so much toleration that the different deities feel more like they fill the role of differing saints rather than marking a religious "other" group. The real historical niche that existed in a lot of Europe outside of Britain, where a group was tolerated and yet still marked as "other," is rarely seen in our fantasy worlds.

Implications

So how do we turn these different structures for religious differentiation into practical, tangible worldbuilding? What larger lessons can we take away?

Rebellion vs Conquest

One of the main takeaways from this historical mode of classifying religious relations is in their role in domestic politics.

In areas with large external, religiously different groups – in places like Hungary, for example, where first Pagans and then Muslims were a foreign entity on their border – the kingdoms tended to unify and rally together. Kings faced relatively little in the way of internal disputes or rebellions. They also tended to have less centralized power, positioning them more in line with their nobility – and even despite this comparatively empowered nobility, they rarely fought against those nobles.

Often, these kingdoms were highly militaristic in the way of presenting their rule. For example, in Spain, the coinage of the king was nearly identical symbolically to coins minted by lesser nobles: the king sat mounted on a horse with a drawn sword, indicating their martial prowess. In contrast, in a place like England which had fewer religiously different enemies to face, the King's coins emphasized the king as judge and law, with the king seated on a throne with his regalia, an image that was often not permitted for lesser nobility to use.

In contrast, in areas without large external, religiously othered threats, the idea of heresy was far more important. In France, for example, the French town of Toulouse was famed for being a haven for religious dissidents, so much so that it was called by a Pope the den of "the age-old seduction of wicked heresy." Without an external other to combat, that militaristic religious fervor turned inwards against dissidents.

This was connected to more secular political disunity as well. France was also known for, in its early years, being essentially a non-existent realm. The King only exerted any real control over Paris and its immediate surroundings, while landowners in the rest of the country essentially operated as petty kings in their own right. They paid only lip service to the King in Paris. This independence allowed for regional religious differences to flourish, and wars against heretics were also wars where the King attempted to exert secular political control in the guise of religious purification.

Examples from My World

To demonstrate this, I want to use some examples from my home game's world.

In my world, the country of Turith is a fairly religiously homogenous one. It is a predominantly tiefling one, and they worship a set of gods called the "Dark Powers." However, despite their name, these deities are not wholly evil; rather, they preach a doctrine of obedience to one's primal instincts. If you wish to murder, that is acceptable if it is out of pure, instinctual rage. If you wish to hoard gold, that is acceptable if you're doing it to act like Scrooge McDuck and swim through a sea of coins. However, it also means that if you wish to help your neighbor out of genuine affection, you must also obey that instinct. You are encouraged to obey your better angels as much as your worst demons. It is holy to resist an unjust law.

Turith's king does not have much power. They are essentially just the first among equals. They are elected from the ranks of the nobility by the nobility. He is not empowered to raise taxes beyond what is voluntarily given to him by the nobles. He is only empowered to declare war, not to conscript soldiers (as that would violate their primal, religious rights).

Part of this stems from how Turith was formed and how it spent its first several centuries. Sitting on Turith's border is a massive empire. That empire, which had a pseudo-Catholic faith, worshipping a Creator god, had lost Turith in a rebellion and regularly fought wars to try to reclaim the land. They claimed many of these wars as holy wars to "liberate" the territory from the "evil" of the "Dark Powers."

Turith, however, rarely faces internal rebellion or civil war. Knowing that a moment of disunity would allow the neighboring empire to invade, even the chaotic and hard-to-govern tieflings fall in line to obey the electoral process. As a result, they follow our model of a fairly militarized monarchy, with the monarch as a first among equals, with a strong sense of unity in the face of an external threat.

In contrast, the most religiously pluralistic society in my world is Iberawa. Iberawa certainly does note the different religions within its borders, but full legal toleration is the law of the land. Religious groups other than the religion of the ruling class (so, for example, a follower of the Dark Powers residing in Iberawa) are considered "other," but they are allowed freedom of worship. This fills that abandoned niche of a distinctly othering and yet tolerant society.

Iberawa only shares one, easily defensible border, giving them a solid position to not have to face a threatening external enemy. As a result, they are far more internally fragmented. The nobility of the realm is empowered, but they use this power to foment coups and civil wars.

And while religion is fully tolerated, when heretical sects of the dominant religion spring up--including sects that try to mix the teachings of the dominant religion with those of the minority religions as a way to appeal to converts--the King ruthlessly seeks to put them down as a key way to exert his secular political control.

By the era of my current game, many of these conflicts have mutated. Turith's enemy has turned still-religiously-different ally as its attention shifts to other fronts, which has led to Turith's first major full-blown civil war in centuries (as they no longer need unity to avoid being conquered). Iberawa is still plagued by internal strife, even overthrowing their monarchy on religious grounds, while nevertheless proclaiming legal freedom of worship. Just not for the dead monarchs.

Conclusion

I still want to expand the role of heresy in my game and my world. It is an underdeveloped part of my world – stay tuned; if people are interested in hearing my thoughts as I work on that, let me know of your interest in that subject in the comments! Still, hopefully this shows how these niches can be used in your own worldbuilding.

Thank you as always for reading and supporting Veritas Tabletop! Be sure to subscribe to the blog for more like this, and let me know what articles you've been enjoying best in the comments so I can do more like it. Do you want more homebrew-focused things? More history? More reviews?