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
 Untheric and Mulhorandi pantheons

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
Eltheron Posted - 07 Sep 2015 : 19:09:07
Just a quick poll, because I'm curious what people think.

In 5E, many culled Faerunian gods are "back" in some sense - revived, restored, or reborn in some way (e.g. Bhaal, Eilistraee, Mystra).

For a long time now, Unther's pantheon has been almost entirely decimated/destroyed, and Mulhorand's pantheon has been culled or partly merged into the Faerunian pantheon. Would you like to see the gods of Unther and Mulhorand restored?
30   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
Nilus Reynard Posted - 16 Dec 2015 : 20:51:51
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

I'm a bit of an oddball, with the divine thing -- I want the gods to be as they were during 2E/3E. No divine soap operas, no bizarre culling of pantheons, no "Human deity X is really racial deity Y!", no "there's too many deities, so let us introduce a couple new ones!" -- none of that. By the same token, though, I like Leira and the Dead Three remaining dead, and my theory that Bane 2.0 is really Xvim.



Pretty much what I wanted to say.
Gyor Posted - 16 Nov 2015 : 00:53:21
Its interesting that according to the SCAG the Mulhorand Pantheon set aside last differences for the sake of the Mulhorand people and that the people love them for it, its like at first glance Mulhorand is back to its old pre 4e ways, but on closer examination its a new beginning and things really aren't the same.
Irennan Posted - 14 Nov 2015 : 19:15:09
Well, his purpose is to be a deus-ex-machina, so...
Brylock Posted - 14 Nov 2015 : 19:08:00
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan

quote:
Originally posted by Brylock

quote:
Originally posted by Irennan

quote:
Originally posted by Brylock

He must be crankier then he used to be then, because he's back weather he wanted it or not.



Blame Ao for that...



Was it ACTUALLY Ao?
There's basically zero explanation as to why things happened the way they happened I believe, and if Ao resurrected them then it certainly didn't mention it anywhere in the SCAG; guys like Myrkul and Azuth are just back, no explanation.
Beyond the real-life "perhaps changing literally everything about the Realms WAS a mistake after all" attitude WotC seems to have taken up.



The book talks about the Sundering. The Sundering is started by Ao rewriting the Tablets of Fate and separating the two worlds again. So it's indirect, but it was him (it?).



Ao really IS the Deity of Editorial Whim or something, isn't he? Sheesh.
Irennan Posted - 14 Nov 2015 : 18:42:15
quote:
Originally posted by Brylock

quote:
Originally posted by Irennan

quote:
Originally posted by Brylock

He must be crankier then he used to be then, because he's back weather he wanted it or not.



Blame Ao for that...



Was it ACTUALLY Ao?
There's basically zero explanation as to why things happened the way they happened I believe, and if Ao resurrected them then it certainly didn't mention it anywhere in the SCAG; guys like Myrkul and Azuth are just back, no explanation.
Beyond the real-life "perhaps changing literally everything about the Realms WAS a mistake after all" attitude WotC seems to have taken up.



The book talks about the Sundering. The Sundering is started by Ao rewriting the Tablets of Fate and separating the two worlds again. So it's indirect, but it was him (it?).
Brylock Posted - 14 Nov 2015 : 18:12:24
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan

quote:
Originally posted by Brylock

He must be crankier then he used to be then, because he's back weather he wanted it or not.



Blame Ao for that...



Was it ACTUALLY Ao?
There's basically zero explanation as to why things happened the way they happened I believe, and if Ao resurrected them then it certainly didn't mention it anywhere in the SCAG; guys like Myrkul and Azuth are just back, no explanation.
Beyond the real-life "perhaps changing literally everything about the Realms WAS a mistake after all" attitude WotC seems to have taken up.
Wooly Rupert Posted - 14 Nov 2015 : 18:02:07
quote:
Originally posted by Brylock

He must be crankier then he used to be then, because he's back weather he wanted it or not.



I've been pondering a plot by Myrkul to shed his godhood, but thus far, I've got nothing.
Irennan Posted - 14 Nov 2015 : 17:13:45
quote:
Originally posted by Brylock

He must be crankier then he used to be then, because he's back weather he wanted it or not.



Blame Ao for that...
Brylock Posted - 14 Nov 2015 : 16:45:52
He must be crankier then he used to be then, because he's back weather he wanted it or not.
Wooly Rupert Posted - 14 Nov 2015 : 16:31:39
quote:
Originally posted by Brylock

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

Lathander is a god of dawn, not of the sun. This is explicitly stated in the SCAG.

And Myrkul did not have any backup plan for coming back to life. We don't know how he returned to godhood, but his survival as an (non-divine) entity was an accident, and he did not seek a return to godhood -- he was explicitly stated as being happier not being a god.



Myrkul had his hat.
The one that gave you his personality (or remnants of it) when you wore it.



True, but his hat was not a backup plan -- it just happened to be close enough for him to hop into when he was slain. And he was happier occupying it and not being a deity -- this has been explicitly stated.
Brylock Posted - 14 Nov 2015 : 16:12:46
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

Lathander is a god of dawn, not of the sun. This is explicitly stated in the SCAG.

And Myrkul did not have any backup plan for coming back to life. We don't know how he returned to godhood, but his survival as an (non-divine) entity was an accident, and he did not seek a return to godhood -- he was explicitly stated as being happier not being a god.



Myrkul had his hat.
The one that gave you his personality (or remnants of it) when you wore it.
Wooly Rupert Posted - 14 Nov 2015 : 15:35:08
Lathander is a god of dawn, not of the sun. This is explicitly stated in the SCAG.

And Myrkul did not have any backup plan for coming back to life. We don't know how he returned to godhood, but his survival as an (non-divine) entity was an accident, and he did not seek a return to godhood -- he was explicitly stated as being happier not being a god.
Brylock Posted - 14 Nov 2015 : 10:31:48
I noticed that aside from the Mulhorondi pantheon being brought back, other deities with shared portfolios now exist within the SAME pantheon: Lathander and Aumanator are now both in the same Greater Faerunian Pantheon despite both being sun deities, and Bhaal and Myrkul are back too though since it's been shown that literally ALL of the Dead Three had secret Get Out of Death Free cards that surprises me not at all.
Given that the whole "1 portfolio for any subject and only 1 deity gets it" thing was basically the Rule of Ao, and Ao was almost literally the Personification of Editorially Mandated Whims (he was created by TSR during the ToT to resolve a problem that Greenwood felt no need to resolve, and in fact he's been GMing his game as if that entire thing never happened for decades now) maybe it's just that Ao's arbitrary rule of "one God for one portfolio and one God only" rule has been abolished or something.
There were people who believed in Lathander and the sun as a more bright and warm Apollo-like figure, and people who believed in the sun as an orderly and neat time-piece that followed the celestial cosmos and kept thinhs running as Aumanator, so without Ao's random proclemations ("one of you did a BAD THING so clearly ALL OF YOU have to be stranded on Toril....except for Helm, Helm's ma boy") dictating junk (perhaps explained by the destruction of the Tablets of Fate), both existed and now have to compete for worshippers, though really aside from the whole "sun" part very different people would gravitate towards the two deities.
This could also explain why Bhaal and Myrkul are back (both had long-lasting cults even after death) though given exactly HOW Bhaal showed up when he did, my guess is that his "Highlander Plan" finally worked out and the dude that exploded and turned into Bhaal was a Bhaalspawn without him knowing it. It's basically the same plan Bane had with Xvim after all, only Bane put all his eggs in one basket and Bhaal did not, though this meant it took about 110 years and 3 editions for his plan to finally come to fruition.
Gyor Posted - 12 Nov 2015 : 20:29:32
Yeah, very hardcore.
combatmedic Posted - 12 Nov 2015 : 17:19:14
Abeir sounds pretty hardcore.

I like that they did not just wave the retcon wand at 4E FR.

sleyvas Posted - 12 Nov 2015 : 17:06:41
quote:
Originally posted by Gyor

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic

quote:
Originally posted by Gyor

The Mulhorand Gods are back and so is Gilgeam of the Untherite Pantheon, but in Incarnation form, so you can visit them in Mulhorand and Unther.

This was done without destroying Tymanther, but High Imaskar got exiled into the Purple Plains.

This seems to violate the rule about Gods being distant that they had for 5e.

Also the Mulhorand Gods no longer support slavery, nor are they as culturally isolated. Ra and Horus are seperate again.

I wish they're give more details.

They don't give any domains for the Mulhorand Gods, but its mentioned that God Kings are grant Undying Pacts.



Ugh. No temple slavery in Mulhorand now? Sounds like the politically correct police have taken over at Hasbro.




Please. I'm tired of the "political correctness" card getting played every time something gets changed.

This is a change in one area, and it has an in-setting explanation. There is still slavery in the other, more popular areas of the Realms.

Using a story to get rid of something negative in one small corner of the setting and not anywhere else is pretty far from being "politically correct".



While I believe political correctness is getting increasingly goofy and fantatical in society, this is not an instance of it.

High Imaskar already elimated slavery in the region, so when the Mulhorandi Gods over threw the Imaskar as "Liberators", it would be a hard sell to the Mulhorand people to Liberate them by making them slaves.

Also take into account that many of the Mulhorandi Gods'current mortal incarnations/chosen were raised in cultures that frowned and even loathed slavery.

Its why the old books on Mulhorand are useful as history books, but they don't really tell you who the Mulhorandi Gods are now and what the current political climate is like.

Think on this, none of the Mulhorandi Gods current incarnations were raised in a Mulhorandi culture, they were raised in Chessenta, High Imaskar, ect... So they have these ancient memories, but they also have these new current experience, values, ect... That's bound to change them.

Mulhorand is no longer as culturally isolationist.







very good arguments. I had seen Mulhorand coming back differently (i.e. they return from Abeir where their culture would have remained more intact), so this factor will change Mulhorand. Unther on the other hand seems to have returned from Abeir, so it will have a definitely different cultural view. Considering that some of Unther was Mulhorandi.... that also brings in some interesting ideas. I need to ponder this.
Gyor Posted - 12 Nov 2015 : 01:40:36
quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic

quote:
Originally posted by Gyor

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic

quote:
Originally posted by Gyor

The Mulhorand Gods are back and so is Gilgeam of the Untherite Pantheon, but in Incarnation form, so you can visit them in Mulhorand and Unther.

This was done without destroying Tymanther, but High Imaskar got exiled into the Purple Plains.

This seems to violate the rule about Gods being distant that they had for 5e.

Also the Mulhorand Gods no longer support slavery, nor are they as culturally isolated. Ra and Horus are seperate again.

I wish they're give more details.

They don't give any domains for the Mulhorand Gods, but its mentioned that God Kings are grant Undying Pacts.



Ugh. No temple slavery in Mulhorand now? Sounds like the politically correct police have taken over at Hasbro.




Please. I'm tired of the "political correctness" card getting played every time something gets changed.

This is a change in one area, and it has an in-setting explanation. There is still slavery in the other, more popular areas of the Realms.

Using a story to get rid of something negative in one small corner of the setting and not anywhere else is pretty far from being "politically correct".



While I believe political correctness is getting increasingly goofy and fantatical in society, this is not an instance of it.

High Imaskar already elimated slavery in the region, so when the Mulhorandi Gods over threw the Imaskar as "Liberators", it would be a hard sell to the Mulhorand people to Liberate them by making them slaves.

Also take into account that many of the Mulhorandi Gods'current mortal incarnations/chosen were raised in cultures that frowned and even loathed slavery.

Its why the old books on Mulhorand are useful as history books, but they don't really tell you who the Mulhorandi Gods are now and what the current political climate is like.

Think on this, none of the Mulhorandi Gods current incarnations were raised in a Mulhorandi culture, they were raised in Chessenta, High Imaskar, ect... So they have these ancient memories, but they also have these new current experience, values, ect... That's bound to change them.

Mulhorand is no longer as culturally isolationist.






They could have enslaved the Imaskari instead of exiling them, no? Wouldn't that be poetic justice, as the Imaskari were the ones who first brought the Mulan to Troil and made them slaves?
Indeed, and bound the gods?

But, sure, removing Mulhorandi gods' support for a form of slavery could be seen not as motivated by marketing concerns and instead a design decision that flowed entirely from the play of world building. I doubt that, in light of some other stuff that is off topic here, but one could see it that way. I don't agree with your argument, but that doesn't mean I have special insight into the design process. You could be right. Or maybe I am.


That is all I have on this one, unless somebody has questions.



The Imaskar cut and ran into the purple desert, there is no one to enslave and given that the High Imaskar outlawed slavery, it would be a hard sell to enslave them. Not that there is anyone left to enslave.

Again despite what many people have said this isn't 1e/2/e/3e reborn, the 5e realms are its own thing, influenced by all previous editions.

People look at the map of most of Faerun and see that the geography is like 1e and then read that many of the lost empires are back, and so are the lost gods, but this is an inche deep and a mile wide.

Too much has happened and none of these regions are like they used to be, many of the NPCs are dead, there are many new players, and there have been a ton of events that changed them. Most places that were in Abier were tramatized by that, Abier was not a friendly place, brutal in fact dominated by dragons lords and primordials.

That sort of experience leaves a legacy.

And there enough holdovers from 4e and new twists in 5e that the whole thing is a new ball game.
Gyor Posted - 12 Nov 2015 : 01:26:01
quote:
Originally posted by Stones Finder

While I'm pleased to hear that Mulhorand and Unther are coming back, I'm not wild about Gilgeam returning. His death, and the subsequent chaos in Unther, was one of the most interesting things to come out of the Time of Troubles.



The current Gilgeam actually seems more interesting then the last, he arose in Abier offering to help Liberate the Untherites from domination by other beings back in Abier.

So a war errupted and Gilgeam was close to winning, the final battle was about to be fought when Unther was shifted back to Toril.

So the God King Gilgeam turned his forces against the Dragonborn of Tymanther, driving them towards the coasts mostly. The remaining territory of Tymanther is the most forified, so there appears to be a current stalemate. And the Untherite Fleet is of no use as the waters in Tymanther's remaining territory is protected by some aquatic beast.

And there is tension between between Mulhorand and Unther, because the Mulhorandi control some of Unther's former territory.

Of course nether Mulhorand or Unther would care for the High Imaskari exiled to the Plains of Purple, so the that's more tension.

The Old Empires are filled with tension.

Also cool, Gilgeam is mentioned as a Undying Warlock Patron.
combatmedic Posted - 12 Nov 2015 : 01:14:20
quote:
Originally posted by Gyor

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic

quote:
Originally posted by Gyor

The Mulhorand Gods are back and so is Gilgeam of the Untherite Pantheon, but in Incarnation form, so you can visit them in Mulhorand and Unther.

This was done without destroying Tymanther, but High Imaskar got exiled into the Purple Plains.

This seems to violate the rule about Gods being distant that they had for 5e.

Also the Mulhorand Gods no longer support slavery, nor are they as culturally isolated. Ra and Horus are seperate again.

I wish they're give more details.

They don't give any domains for the Mulhorand Gods, but its mentioned that God Kings are grant Undying Pacts.



Ugh. No temple slavery in Mulhorand now? Sounds like the politically correct police have taken over at Hasbro.




Please. I'm tired of the "political correctness" card getting played every time something gets changed.

This is a change in one area, and it has an in-setting explanation. There is still slavery in the other, more popular areas of the Realms.

Using a story to get rid of something negative in one small corner of the setting and not anywhere else is pretty far from being "politically correct".



While I believe political correctness is getting increasingly goofy and fantatical in society, this is not an instance of it.

High Imaskar already elimated slavery in the region, so when the Mulhorandi Gods over threw the Imaskar as "Liberators", it would be a hard sell to the Mulhorand people to Liberate them by making them slaves.

Also take into account that many of the Mulhorandi Gods'current mortal incarnations/chosen were raised in cultures that frowned and even loathed slavery.

Its why the old books on Mulhorand are useful as history books, but they don't really tell you who the Mulhorandi Gods are now and what the current political climate is like.

Think on this, none of the Mulhorandi Gods current incarnations were raised in a Mulhorandi culture, they were raised in Chessenta, High Imaskar, ect... So they have these ancient memories, but they also have these new current experience, values, ect... That's bound to change them.

Mulhorand is no longer as culturally isolationist.






They could have enslaved the Imaskari instead of exiling them, no? Wouldn't that be poetic justice, as the Imaskari were the ones who first brought the Mulan to Troil and made them slaves?
Indeed, and bound the gods?

But, sure, removing Mulhorandi gods' support for a form of slavery could be seen not as motivated by marketing concerns and instead a design decision that flowed entirely from the play of world building. I doubt that, in light of some other stuff that is off topic here, but one could see it that way. I don't agree with your argument, but that doesn't mean I have special insight into the design process. You could be right. Or maybe I am.


That is all I have on this one, unless somebody has questions.
Gyor Posted - 12 Nov 2015 : 01:14:04
quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic

Disagree. Even assuming that slavery must be" negative" brings real world political ideology into the fantasy setting in a way I dislike. The temple slave system in Mulhorand is cool, fun, game worthy, and constitutes a distinct cultural feature.

YMMV



I'm not arguing whether or not the temple slavery was good or bad or what it added to the setting. I'm saying that removing temple slavery from a corner of the Realms that is not part of the main area, and leaving the regular, full-on involuntary slavery everywhere else it exists in the setting, is not political correctness. Political correctness would have been removing all slavery from the entire setting -- not just one small area that most people ignore, anyway.



Now I disagree even more strongly with you than I did before.
Removing the best example of good aligned deities directly approving of a form of slavery and leaving slavery as a thing done only by designated baddies ( and maybe a few morally ambiguous neutral aligned types ) looks ridiculously PC to me. Actually removing all slavery would have been slightly less PC.

I think all this PC stuff in gaming the new Satanic Panic, and the attempts by nerdy game designers to appease the ever unhappy SJW crowd is the new TSR Code of Ethics. Festhalls! LOL.


We both have strong opinions. I can respect your view, although I do not share it. You might look at Hasbro design and marketing decisions (and those of Paizo, the big competitor) in a very different way than I see these things. That does not make you stupid. It just means we have different understandings of trends. No biggie.

If you do think it is worth further discussion, I'd be happy to read your posts. Maybe in a spin off thread? I don't want to derail this one.




There is still Calimshan that's not evil, it was liberated by a Chosen of Ilmater, but might still have slavery.
Gyor Posted - 12 Nov 2015 : 01:10:58
quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic

Disagree. Even assuming that slavery must be" negative" brings real world political ideology into the fantasy setting in a way I dislike. The temple slave system in Mulhorand is cool, fun, game worthy, and constitutes a distinct cultural feature.

YMMV



I get what your saying, but you can't seperate the slavery issue from HOW the Mulhorand Gods came back and the current situation.

I think if the Mulhorandi Gods had come back and said "Join me and I will Liberate you from freedom and put you IN chains, making slaves of most of you" would be a rough sell, if the Mulhorandi Gods had offered that, the Mulans would have stayed in exile or with the Imaskari.

If you read the section of the SCAG on Mulhorand, while there isn't much, its pretty clear that the Mulhorand Gods presented themselves as Liberators of the Mulan people agianst the restrictions of the High Imaskari, comparing said restrictions to slavery.

So coming back and over throwing the High Imaskari who legally banned slavery, in the name of restoring Liberty, it makes no sense to restore legal slavery.

It Mulhorand: The Next Generation.

Set used to be a priah, now he's a co Pharoh along with the other Mulhorand Gods.

Its the 4th Mulhorand Empire, and its a very different Mulhorand.
combatmedic Posted - 12 Nov 2015 : 01:05:43
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic

Disagree. Even assuming that slavery must be" negative" brings real world political ideology into the fantasy setting in a way I dislike. The temple slave system in Mulhorand is cool, fun, game worthy, and constitutes a distinct cultural feature.

YMMV



I'm not arguing whether or not the temple slavery was good or bad or what it added to the setting. I'm saying that removing temple slavery from a corner of the Realms that is not part of the main area, and leaving the regular, full-on involuntary slavery everywhere else it exists in the setting, is not political correctness. Political correctness would have been removing all slavery from the entire setting -- not just one small area that most people ignore, anyway.



Now I disagree even more strongly with you than I did before.
Removing the best example of good aligned deities directly approving of a form of slavery and leaving slavery as a thing done only by designated baddies ( and maybe a few morally ambiguous neutral aligned types ) looks ridiculously PC to me. Actually removing all slavery would have been slightly less PC.

I think all this PC stuff in gaming the new Satanic Panic, and the attempts by nerdy game designers to appease the ever unhappy SJW crowd is the new TSR Code of Ethics. Festhalls! LOL.


We both have strong opinions. I can respect your view, although I do not share it. You might look at Hasbro design and marketing decisions (and those of Paizo, the big competitor) in a very different way than I see these things. That does not make you stupid. It just means we have different understandings of trends. No biggie.

If you do think it is worth further discussion, I'd be happy to read your posts. Maybe in a spin off thread? I don't want to derail this one.
Gyor Posted - 12 Nov 2015 : 00:58:33
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic

quote:
Originally posted by Gyor

The Mulhorand Gods are back and so is Gilgeam of the Untherite Pantheon, but in Incarnation form, so you can visit them in Mulhorand and Unther.

This was done without destroying Tymanther, but High Imaskar got exiled into the Purple Plains.

This seems to violate the rule about Gods being distant that they had for 5e.

Also the Mulhorand Gods no longer support slavery, nor are they as culturally isolated. Ra and Horus are seperate again.

I wish they're give more details.

They don't give any domains for the Mulhorand Gods, but its mentioned that God Kings are grant Undying Pacts.



Ugh. No temple slavery in Mulhorand now? Sounds like the politically correct police have taken over at Hasbro.




Please. I'm tired of the "political correctness" card getting played every time something gets changed.

This is a change in one area, and it has an in-setting explanation. There is still slavery in the other, more popular areas of the Realms.

Using a story to get rid of something negative in one small corner of the setting and not anywhere else is pretty far from being "politically correct".



While I believe political correctness is getting increasingly goofy and fantatical in society, this is not an instance of it.

High Imaskar already elimated slavery in the region, so when the Mulhorandi Gods over threw the Imaskar as "Liberators", it would be a hard sell to the Mulhorand people to Liberate them by making them slaves.

Also take into account that many of the Mulhorandi Gods'current mortal incarnations/chosen were raised in cultures that frowned and even loathed slavery.

Its why the old books on Mulhorand are useful as history books, but they don't really tell you who the Mulhorandi Gods are now and what the current political climate is like.

Think on this, none of the Mulhorandi Gods current incarnations were raised in a Mulhorandi culture, they were raised in Chessenta, High Imaskar, ect... So they have these ancient memories, but they also have these new current experience, values, ect... That's bound to change them.

Mulhorand is no longer as culturally isolationist.


Wooly Rupert Posted - 12 Nov 2015 : 00:00:44
quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic

Disagree. Even assuming that slavery must be" negative" brings real world political ideology into the fantasy setting in a way I dislike. The temple slave system in Mulhorand is cool, fun, game worthy, and constitutes a distinct cultural feature.

YMMV



I'm not arguing whether or not the temple slavery was good or bad or what it added to the setting. I'm saying that removing temple slavery from a corner of the Realms that is not part of the main area, and leaving the regular, full-on involuntary slavery everywhere else it exists in the setting, is not political correctness. Political correctness would have been removing all slavery from the entire setting -- not just one small area that most people ignore, anyway.
combatmedic Posted - 11 Nov 2015 : 23:00:32
Disagree. Even assuming that slavery must be" negative" brings real world political ideology into the fantasy setting in a way I dislike. The temple slave system in Mulhorand is cool, fun, game worthy, and constitutes a distinct cultural feature.

YMMV
Wooly Rupert Posted - 11 Nov 2015 : 22:01:28
quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic

quote:
Originally posted by Gyor

The Mulhorand Gods are back and so is Gilgeam of the Untherite Pantheon, but in Incarnation form, so you can visit them in Mulhorand and Unther.

This was done without destroying Tymanther, but High Imaskar got exiled into the Purple Plains.

This seems to violate the rule about Gods being distant that they had for 5e.

Also the Mulhorand Gods no longer support slavery, nor are they as culturally isolated. Ra and Horus are seperate again.

I wish they're give more details.

They don't give any domains for the Mulhorand Gods, but its mentioned that God Kings are grant Undying Pacts.



Ugh. No temple slavery in Mulhorand now? Sounds like the politically correct police have taken over at Hasbro.




Please. I'm tired of the "political correctness" card getting played every time something gets changed.

This is a change in one area, and it has an in-setting explanation. There is still slavery in the other, more popular areas of the Realms.

Using a story to get rid of something negative in one small corner of the setting and not anywhere else is pretty far from being "politically correct".
combatmedic Posted - 11 Nov 2015 : 20:48:01
quote:
Originally posted by Stones Finder

While I'm pleased to hear that Mulhorand and Unther are coming back, I'm not wild about Gilgeam returning. His death, and the subsequent chaos in Unther, was one of the most interesting things to come out of the Time of Troubles.



Last time I ran FR ( which was really the only time) I wrote up notes about Gilgeam , post Avatar Crisis. He had reunited with his old planar essence. He shifted to LN alignment. Instead of sitting around oppressing his people for the hell of it, he now wished to rebuild the ancient glory of Unther.
combatmedic Posted - 11 Nov 2015 : 20:43:35
quote:
Originally posted by Gyor

The Mulhorand Gods are back and so is Gilgeam of the Untherite Pantheon, but in Incarnation form, so you can visit them in Mulhorand and Unther.

This was done without destroying Tymanther, but High Imaskar got exiled into the Purple Plains.

This seems to violate the rule about Gods being distant that they had for 5e.

Also the Mulhorand Gods no longer support slavery, nor are they as culturally isolated. Ra and Horus are seperate again.

I wish they're give more details.

They don't give any domains for the Mulhorand Gods, but its mentioned that God Kings are grant Undying Pacts.



Ugh. No temple slavery in Mulhorand now? Sounds like the politically correct police have taken over at Hasbro.
Gyor Posted - 07 Nov 2015 : 13:26:25
quote:
Originally posted by JohnLynch

quote:
Originally posted by Gyor

The Mulhorand Gods are back and so is Gilgeam of the Untherite Pantheon, but in Incarnation form, so you can visit them in Mulhorand and Unther.

This was done without destroying Tymanther, but High Imaskar got exiled into the Purple Plains.
Wait. Is Tymanther still in the 5th edition Forgotten Realms?



Yes, Tymanther has been reduced in size because of a war with Unther, but it still exists, including its capital city. What's left is mostly on the coast.
Lilianviaten Posted - 07 Nov 2015 : 05:47:25
quote:
Originally posted by Stones Finder

While I'm pleased to hear that Mulhorand and Unther are coming back, I'm not wild about Gilgeam returning. His death, and the subsequent chaos in Unther, was one of the most interesting things to come out of the Time of Troubles.




Gilgeam is a cookie cutter tyrant, but I've always wanted to read Shurrupak featured in a novel. He's intriguing.

Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2024 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000