If they both get smites again each other, how can could you tell?
The existence of supernatural powers doesn't automatically answer all metaphysical questions. In fact, it probably raises more than it dispels.
In Fantasy Wargaming the various gods were real. But were mana junkies and needed followers. It also had this disconnect where God sends Jews to Hell. The writers were too busy being condescending to actually write a coherent RPG.
In D&D at least if theres various pantheons present in a setting then usually everyones on the same page. Similar to how Marvel used to write Thor. The various gods were more or less welcoming to like minded or like portfoloio'd gods and incresingly less cordial with those furthest from their general demeanors. They were more than capable of working together in a crisis too. Least some were. They also liked to spar when meeting up to. Especially Thor and Hercules.
So at least in D&D theres some congruency. Of course some settings toss all that out the window and either the different pantheons are really the same gods with different names in different regions. Or its every god for themselves and they each might as well be an individual religion rather than a pantheon.
So setting can have some effect on these spells depending on if the spell is targeting something specific or something vague even.
One of the more bizarre aspects of D&D is the way it treats good and evil as universal. That there is good, and there is evil, and it applies whether you're Vishnu or Set or Marduk or Hades, and that somehow all the gods from all these different religions all agree on what defines good and evil.
That only works if you erase the substantive spiritual differences between those different religions, and pretend they're all just Western humanists with different numbers of arms, who wear clothes of different styles, and have different fantastic creatures pulling their chariots. Which erases a lot of the point of having different cultures in the first place.
I think the astral realm version works a lot better, where each religion can have a different definition of good and evil, and the spells granted by their gods or from the religion as a whole give that definition objective (super)reality. A priest of Lugh and Amaterasu can cast the same spell, and get different answers.
Considering the game was written by western humanists, for gamers in the 20th/21st century, I'm pretty OK with that. If a DM wants to go more in depth about a different morality and spirituality for their campaign's gods, more power to 'em. I think for day to day gaming, most players just want their divine spells granted and a god's name to write down on the religon field of their character sheet.
Greetings!
Excellent point, Ratman!
In my games, I occasionally have a player or two that likes to learn about different campaign religions and cultures--and sometimes they enjoy getting into deep, philosophical discussions with other players about this kind of stuff.
Most of the time though--with most players--it amounts to, asking "Are they considered enemies of my kingdom or my religion?"
*Wizard or Cleric prepares Fireball or Flamestrike*
"Yes, they are considered to be filthy Pagans and enemies of the realm!"
*Whoom!* Fireball explodes, leaving the enemy laying about, burning and moaning.
Wizard or Cleric says, "Ok, the enemy has suffered a taste of judgement. Make sure none of them survives. Kill them all. Let's loot them good, and move on, brothers!"
The group then loots all the bodies carefully, while then providing a quick death to any struggling survivors, before proceeding deeper into the dungeon, where savage monsters lurk.
That's about as deep into "Morality" as a lot of players get.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK