My take is from the scriptural verse that says (I think) - "ye are gods." Which could mean "you are god's" (belong to God), but I usually understand it as acknowledgment that all of us are god-like or divine. While also understanding that there is Source or our Creator. So ultimately I come down on side of monotheism, but I do think it allows for polytheistic construct to help (fully) realize divinity is within each and everyone, rather than say in a certain one from whom I am separate.
I do also have understanding of polytheism as is beings who are essentially not roaming earth physically but are not (exactly) Source. While I generally think of this as Guides, I do often have conception of spirits that manipulate earthly processes, and for sure games of luck. Like I will reference "poker Gods" frequently when playing poker. And reference "golf gods" when playing disc golf. For most part this is done in jest, but today was a day when I couldn't buy a break in disc golf even while my stroke was pretty good. My disc was finding every tree which seems like something more at work than simply 'bad luck.'
Anyway, I digress.
The reason I was confused is because in Hinduism, there are many gods but they are expansions of the One original God, who is unchanged and eternal. Thus many consider it to be monotheism.
But now I see the difference.
I'm not sure I grasp the difference other than I generally don't care too much to explore this too deeply.
Like another way I understand my brand of polytheism is via Demiurge that created the physical and that this being as separated its consciousness into us. There is still unifying spirit while there is illusion of separation and separate purposes, separate divine wills. One has extra powers of say ESP, another has extra powers of telekinesis, etc. Not that I actually see it in that way, but just way to say there is separation and imbalance in 'overall power' of the original form.
But between this rendition, the way I understand Hindu rendition and say the Greek/Roman rendition(s), I still think there is underlying sameness if considering Source. And thus only perceived, made-up differences that are fun to consider, but are ultimately illusionary (I think).
Anyway, that confusion can stay with me as I'm not sure what debate there is to have here. Polytheism assumes a fundamental level of distinction and underlying sameness is essentially asking polytheism to conform to monotheism, which is unfair to some versions of polytheism, I would think.