Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Journals
 General Forgotten Realms Chat
 Lost Empires of Faerun

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Screensize:
UserName:
Password:
Format Mode:
Format: BoldItalicizedUnderlineStrikethrough Align LeftCenteredAlign Right Horizontal Rule Insert HyperlinkInsert Email Insert CodeInsert QuoteInsert List
   
Message:

* HTML is OFF
* Forum Code is ON
Smilies
Smile [:)] Big Smile [:D] Cool [8D] Blush [:I]
Tongue [:P] Evil [):] Wink [;)] Clown [:o)]
Black Eye [B)] Eight Ball [8] Frown [:(] Shy [8)]
Shocked [:0] Angry [:(!] Dead [xx(] Sleepy [|)]
Kisses [:X] Approve [^] Disapprove [V] Question [?]
Rolling Eyes [8|] Confused [?!:] Help [?:] King [3|:]
Laughing [:OD] What [W] Oooohh [:H] Down [:E]

  Check here to include your profile signature.
Check here to subscribe to this topic.
    

T O P I C    R E V I E W
Marc Posted - 02 Oct 2006 : 08:51:02
I'm testing this poll stuff so what do you think which of these civilizations was the most advanced in terms of power (magic, psionics, knowledge, war) if you cannot decide vote for the most interesting.

I vote for Miyeritar.
25   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
Wooly Rupert Posted - 28 Mar 2016 : 18:24:19
quote:
Originally posted by Owesstaer

I think the Imasakari are way too overrated! All they did was preventing the prayers to reach otherworldly gods.




They didn't stop the prayers, they actually blocked those deities from being able to come to the aid of those praying to them.

The Imaskari didn't just tell the gods where to stick it, they slammed the door in the deities' faces, and the deities in question couldn't do anything about that.
Owesstaer Posted - 28 Mar 2016 : 16:37:30
I think the Imasakari are way too overrated! All they did was preventing the prayers to reach otherworldly gods.

Leaves us with Netheril or the elves... not much of a difference in terms of power I'd say, so it would be the way these powers are used that creates the winner. Imo the Wisdom prize goes to the elves, so: Aryvandaar (after all, they nuked the other contestant Miyertar)
Alystra Illianniis Posted - 30 Jul 2012 : 23:40:07
I'd like to see more about the early Avariel kingdom(s), Illithiir, Myeritar, and the lythari lands.
jazirian reborn Posted - 30 Jul 2012 : 07:13:58
I picked an unusual choice of Aryselmar. The emigrated elves of the earliest Crown Wars and the losses in the south to the dark elves led to an empire in the Inner Sea from -11,000 DR to -255 DR when High magic by other elves wiped out a large cross-section of the empire.
Even with the defection of magical leaders to the Dukars , that outstrips almost all others in timeframe of sheer power.
While it could be rightly argued that the Aryselmar were the losers and refugees from the Crown Wars and the Ilythriiri , the elves left in a similar vogue to the retreat to live a more peaceful life.
Both the Imaskar and Netherese retreated from their own homelands after losing out to an avatar of gods (former) or the phaerimm (later).
The Serosians achieved almost entire ownership of all areas inside the Sharksbane wall and without the high magic used to kill off Jhaamdath , might have been the alternate Evermeet.

Netherese colonization was extermined by high magic , and sea elf magic is similar to the roles that both the Creator races AND the Crown Wars played in history , except unlike most human or gold elf empires , the end wasn't self inflicted.
While Seros is a smaller area to rule than the other picks, not angering Corellon to either banish ( dark elves ) or order executions (Vyshaan gold elves) means for me there was enough balance between arcane and divine magic to endure.
The only other comparable elven magic was obliterated by a "falling sky" , and unlike Aryselmar , Uvaeren did end.





Thelonius Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 14:54:13
I am between imaskar and Netheril, Imaskar were incredibly powerful, but netherese could steal a god power and make cities fly...... But anyways I have far more info about Netheril than about Imaskar, so perhaps I should go for them
Dennis Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 14:47:12

I'm not sure if that's how they saw it. Some of them were aware that a few deities were not ascended mortals. I suppose their general or most common perception and attitude towards the divine beings are simply too dismissive... something like telling someone, "Your divine powers are just like my arcane abilities. Hence, I can kill you."
stephenslate Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 09:04:44
I am curious to one point, if a mortal can achieve divinity by having at least 200 followers and look for, and find a way to achieve it, besides being patitioned by a deity to take thus position, then any mere mortal could achieve this over time which in theory the imaskari wizards would be correct in assuming that deities were mere very powerful mortals just like the netheril archwizards believed, i might not have specified everything from the 1st ed. rules and the forgotten realms rules for divine ascension but the point is made.
Thauranil Posted - 29 Dec 2011 : 12:50:22
I voted for Aryvander for their sheer magical power and suicidal arrogance in telling every other elven kingdom to get bent at the end of the Crown wars. I wonder if a splinter faction could possibly be resurrected? And no i dont count the fev ri as Aryvandese.
Dennis Posted - 14 Dec 2011 : 07:14:51
quote:
Originally posted by stephenslate

i went with the choice of netheril because anyone that can can steal or magically take a gods power and leave them a mortal has got to be the top of the art, the only thing that might equal that is the binding ritual of the high magic of the elves but it does not strip the power from a god just binds them so i say hail netheril :)

Indeed. And I must add, other than the new and expanding Reborn Netheril (of Telamont Tanthul), the Old Netheril still has its lingering effects to the practitioners of the Art in the present time.
stephenslate Posted - 14 Dec 2011 : 06:49:42
i went with the choice of netheril because anyone that can can steal or magically take a gods power and leave them a mortal has got to be the top of the art, the only thing that might equal that is the binding ritual of the high magic of the elves but it does not strip the power from a god just binds them so i say hail netheril :)
Dennis Posted - 22 Apr 2011 : 12:07:06

I've been perusing some old tomes...and I find Jhaamdath to be as nearly interesting as Netheril.
GRYPHON Posted - 13 Apr 2011 : 13:26:37
Miyeritar, Uvaeren, and Eaerlann also...
Dennis Posted - 13 Apr 2011 : 11:43:19

Something from The Shadow Stone by Richard Baker: [Highlight is mine.]

quote:

"Thousands of years ago, the Imaskari arose, first of all men to walk in this world. Unfettered by the powers and restrictions of gods, they had nothing to defy their understanding, their comprehension. The glories of Netheril and fallen Raumanthar were mere reflections of the first mages, the sorcerer lords who mas­tered magic in that forgotten age."

Dennis Posted - 07 Oct 2010 : 17:10:13
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha

We don't know that Karsus's Avatar was the most powerful spell in history, it's just the most powerful spell we have referenced.




I see no difference at all.

quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha

I don't understand your point on if they were all agnostic they would work together. That's like saying if everyone wears red hats the sun will rise in the west. The two have nothing to do with each other. The Neth archwizards didn't work together because they were a bunch of arrogant, powerful, suspicious people whose national philosophy was extreme indvidualism, at least amongst its most powerful. Their religious beliefs don't factor into it.




If the problem is extremely alarming - say, some gods worked in mysterious ways to annihilate the empire (but a couple of archwizards learned of it through powerful divination) - I say there is a BIG possibility that they would work together to protect the empire---to raise a godswall or something akin to it. I mentioned they ALL had to be agnostic to do so---otherwise it'd be pointless and ridiculous to protect themselves from the very gods they worship- at least in Selunnara and Shade Enclave's case. Besides, if the haughty and self-serving zulkirs were able to set aside their enmity and unite against a common foe - Szass Tam - I see no reason why the Netherese archwizards can't do the same.
Hoondatha Posted - 07 Oct 2010 : 16:46:13
We don't know that Karsus's Avatar was the most powerful spell in history, it's just the most powerful spell we have referenced. Since we've never had any specifics on the Imaskari, it's entirely possible (in fact probable) that they had magics just as powerful. If we look at existing 11th level spells, it's clear they aren't powerful enough to enact a godswall. That spell was likely 12th level, and likely a ritual spell requiring multiple casters (like elven high magic, or Red Wizard circle magic), based on the plural used in the references to creating it.

I don't understand your point on if they were all agnostic they would work together. That's like saying if everyone wears red hats the sun will rise in the west. The two have nothing to do with each other. The Neth archwizards didn't work together because they were a bunch of arrogant, powerful, suspicious people whose national philosophy was extreme indvidualism, at least amongst its most powerful. Their religious beliefs don't factor into it.
Dennis Posted - 07 Oct 2010 : 16:33:01
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha

Dennis:

Well, first off, the Netherese were atheist/agnostic (leaving aside the debate on exactly which, which as a real-world atheist I find rather fascinating). The archwizards believed that the "gods" were simply other archwizards who had discovered more powerful magic, and many made it their goal to find that secret magic and become gods themselves.




While this maybe true to MOST of the archwizards, I say not to all. Remember there's Selunarra whose patron deity is Selune and Shade Enclave that worships Shar, and I bet there are some others.

quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha

They were also much more fragmented, with each archwizard doing his or her own thing and not working well others.



That's why I think that if they were ALL agnostic – no exception – they could have worked together to raise something like a gods-barrier.

quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha

The closest the Netherese could come to a Godswall was the Scepter of Sorcerer Kings, which isn't very close at all.



You seem to have forgotten Karsus Avatar – the most powerful spell (in history) ever cast by a mere mortal. Had Karsus's problem not been the phaerimm but the annoying meddling of the gods, perhaps it would have taken just ONE ARCHWIZARD – KARSUS – to raise a godswall. The heavy magic that he discovered sounds like the right ingredient for it
Hoondatha Posted - 07 Oct 2010 : 14:22:36
Dennis:

Well, first off, the Netherese were atheist/agnostic (leaving aside the debate on exactly which, which as a real-world atheist I find rather fascinating). The archwizards believed that the "gods" were simply other archwizards who had discovered more powerful magic, and many made it their goal to find that secret magic and become gods themselves. That's why Chronomancer died young, he refused clerical healing magic that would have saved his life, becaus he thought accepting divine magic would mean he could never ascend himself.

That said, I don't think it's possible to argue that the Netherese were stronger in magic than the Imaskari. They were also much more fragmented, with each archwizard doing his or her own thing and not working well others. We don't know much about Imaskari culture so far removed from the empire's fall, but it's clear that its wizards could work together when needed. The amount of coordination that slave raid required boggles the mind.

The closest the Netherese could come to a Godswall was the Scepter of Sorcerer Kings, which isn't very close at all. The Imaskari not only built the wall, they built it quickly, throwing it up to prevent pursuit like some god-sized caltrops. And all of that was after their population, and presumably their magical might, had been decimated by the plague.

Don't get me wrong, Netheril was a powerful empire that did a lot of incredible things. But it wasn't near Imaskar's class.
althen artren Posted - 12 Sep 2010 : 04:16:51
Frankly, I would just like to see some write ups of
Imaskeri spells just to see how to homebrew others.
Dennis Posted - 11 Sep 2010 : 02:24:34
If this was pointed out before, then ignore it; if not, then let me know what you think, fellow scribes.

Imaskar won this poll. But a lot, I noticed (after randomly reading some previous posts), pointed out that they voted for Imaskar because only the Imaskari had raised such powerful barrier that blocked the very gods. Now, had the Netherese been atheists or agnostic, I believe they too could have raised similar or even far stronger barrier. Only they had used ample magic to levitate gigantic mountains and turned them into cities. The spells and artifacts they fashioned, both those which were lost and those that reached the present Toril, are often alluded in several novels for their potency and intricacy. We've seen glimpses of the what the archwizards could do, and still do: Karsus, with his Avatar Spell, Lady Polaris strolling in Hell, Telamont with his near-perfect grasp and control of shadow magic, Larloch with his countless portals that rival those of Imaskar, and so on...Erecting a gods-barrier would have been more than possible if the archwizards, with their lackeys, both Netherese and hired or apprenticed non-Neth wizards, worked together.

Quale Posted - 10 Sep 2010 : 22:27:59
Yes, it's left to whatever the DM wants to play it. The Athar also disagree on the ''Great Unkown''. When I played the Imaskari, one of the opinions was, there is God, but it's not here and the multiverse is a near-infinitely pale reflection of it. So they searched.
Icelander Posted - 10 Sep 2010 : 17:34:21
quote:
Originally posted by dennis


Agnostic: one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god. I don't think the Imaskari fit this definition. They believed in gods, hence the barrier. But they did not think that gods superseded them in any way; that the gods governed them (Prime Mover); that they were created by gods.

The possibility alone that such divine entities exist, as you suggest, negates the very premise of agnosticism.

So what is my stand on the Imaskari's religious outlook/disposition? They are *still* theists, but to a very limited extent, for they acknowledged the existence of the gods yet denied that such entities were omniscient and omnipotent.

You're still confused on the definition of 'God or a god'. There is no logical reason to conflate belief in supernatural powerful planar beings in a fantasy world with the religious convinction that these beings are in any way divine.

The Imarskari could believe, with perfect logic, either of the following:

a) These powerful beings are not Gods, but Gods may or may not exist.
b) These powerful beings are not Gods and it is impossible to have true knowledge about the existence of Gods.


They could also believe two other possibiliites, with less immaculate logic, but it is sufficient for many real people:

c) These powerful beings are not Gods and there is no such thing as a God.
d) These powerful beings are Gods, but we don't like them and won't follow them.


Of these, b represent true agnosticism. Option a is close enough so that many people are content to call it agnosticism. Option c is atheism.

We can't exclude any of the above on the basis that the Imarskari built a wall designed to keep out powerful planar beings that gained power from the worship of mortals. The fact that they were aware of the existence of such beings does not imply that such beings fit their definition of what the term 'God' represents.
The Sage Posted - 10 Sep 2010 : 05:44:03
quote:
Originally posted by dennis

quote:
Originally posted by The Sage

quote:
Originally posted by Icelander

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by Maruluthu Mistrivvin

The problem here was in the imaskari. Though I see no logic here, surely the most powerful imaskari were atheists, but did they promote and enforce this idea on all their citizens.


They couldn't have been atheists. It's really hard to build a barrier against and do battle with something if you don't believe it exists. Kinda pointless, too.


If I can touch the table, I don't have to believe in it. It's there, sure, but that doesn't make it something to worship.

It's perfectly possible to be an atheist despite the demonstrated presence of powerful beings that call themselves gods. After all, an Imarscari archmage could easily pass himself off a as a god in front of a primitive tribe.

Who's to say that the beings calling themselves gods are not just more powerful archmages? Monsters? Spirits?

What's stopping a person from not believing in any special divine origin for the so-called gods? For simply believing that they are powerful beings who have discovered a way to gain more power by deceiving mortals into worshipping them?

I've long reasoned that the Imaskari were likely agnostic... to a degree, and that they were a rather ambitious lot when trying to ensure such a mindset came to represent their thinking on religious matters for an entire race.

So, instead, the barrier was constructed and instituted as form of insurance, against something that *may* exist.





Agnostic: one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god. I don't think the Imaskari fit this definition. They believed in gods, hence the barrier. But they did not think that gods superseded them in any way; that the gods governed them (Prime Mover); that they were created by gods.

The possibility alone that such divine entities exist, as you suggest, negates the very premise of agnosticism.
The Imaskari, as I noted early, would seem to fit more effectively into the categorised "indeterminism" of the gods, as Clifford speaks of in some of his lectures. They may have believed in what could typically be called "gods," but they certainly didn't see them as the "be all end all" of divine reality. I believe some Imaskari saw the barrier, as it was constructed, as a means of supporting that belief. A true deity would be able to breach the barrier. They weren't committing themselves to either the reality or unreality of the gods. Rather, they were guarding against what may be seen as gods in the eyes of others.
Dennis Posted - 10 Sep 2010 : 04:37:56
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage

quote:
Originally posted by Icelander

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by Maruluthu Mistrivvin

The problem here was in the imaskari. Though I see no logic here, surely the most powerful imaskari were atheists, but did they promote and enforce this idea on all their citizens.


They couldn't have been atheists. It's really hard to build a barrier against and do battle with something if you don't believe it exists. Kinda pointless, too.


If I can touch the table, I don't have to believe in it. It's there, sure, but that doesn't make it something to worship.

It's perfectly possible to be an atheist despite the demonstrated presence of powerful beings that call themselves gods. After all, an Imarscari archmage could easily pass himself off a as a god in front of a primitive tribe.

Who's to say that the beings calling themselves gods are not just more powerful archmages? Monsters? Spirits?

What's stopping a person from not believing in any special divine origin for the so-called gods? For simply believing that they are powerful beings who have discovered a way to gain more power by deceiving mortals into worshipping them?

I've long reasoned that the Imaskari were likely agnostic... to a degree, and that they were a rather ambitious lot when trying to ensure such a mindset came to represent their thinking on religious matters for an entire race.

So, instead, the barrier was constructed and instituted as form of insurance, against something that *may* exist.





Agnostic: one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god. I don't think the Imaskari fit this definition. They believed in gods, hence the barrier. But they did not think that gods superseded them in any way; that the gods governed them (Prime Mover); that they were created by gods.

The possibility alone that such divine entities exist, as you suggest, negates the very premise of agnosticism.

So what is my stand on the Imaskari's religious outlook/disposition? They are *still* theists, but to a very limited extent, for they acknowledged the existence of the gods yet denied that such entities were omniscient and omnipotent.
The Sage Posted - 10 Sep 2010 : 03:06:29
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander

quote:
Originally posted by The Sage

I was actually relying more on William Kingdon Clifford's thinking on agnosticism.


He was a follower of Huxley and would be familiar with the original definition.

Of course. But his later "insufficient evidence" and "indeterminism" claims are generally what I use to support my thinking of the religious observances of the Imaskari. They tend to fit the model of the Imaskari belief system somewhat more appropriately, I think.
Icelander Posted - 10 Sep 2010 : 03:01:31
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage

I was actually relying more on William Kingdon Clifford's thinking on agnosticism.


He was a follower of Huxley and would be familiar with the original definition.

Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2020 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000