| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Galuf the Dwarf |
Posted - 17 Jun 2018 : 16:04:28
Okay, so we know Gond has the aspect of Nebelun the Meddler in the Gnome Pantheon and Bast/Sharess has the aspect of Zandilar the Dancer worshipped among the Elves of the Yuirwood. Lolth has been masquerading as the dead god Moander in the Faerunian Pantheon. Technically, Tymora is worshipped as she is amongst many halflings, namely Lightfoot Halflings, but does not seem to have an actual aspect. What about other pantheons, though? Are there aspects of Faerunian deities amongst the Drow, Dwarf, Halfling and Orc Pantheons? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 21 Jun 2018 : 04:33:05
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
The problem is that gods if a god is dependant upon a portfolio and obedience of worshippers and have the option to control people to the degree that many believe then they would almost certainly do so.
Tyr is the god of law, he cannot allow his faithful to break the law and will prevent and punish those that try. Vhaeraun cannot allow his church to suddenly change into something that supports Lolth and so it cannot happen otherwise Vhaeraun vastly loses his power and risks deific death.
If a being has the power to be aware of almost anything and achieve almost anything then they will almost certainly do so to preserve their own existence.
Or the alternative is that they are not all aware and people can generally behave as they desire allowing all manner of people into a church (the greedy and self serving, the normal and unsure, and the fanatically pious). All a god can do is try and influence things to their desire through signs and portents and the occasional divine servant.
As Wooly said, it is somewhere in between. Mortals also have free will, and the gods know this. They don't control a mortal's every move. Granted, the rigidity of control will vary from deity to deity (Lolthite society vs Eilistraeen, for example). Tyr also holds his followers to more rigid, higher standards, because they are the upholders of law. However, I doubt he would strike down an individual who slipped up, unless he did something *really* bad.
To use a quote from F&A in regards to the spheres (regions on Toril) of influence: A pantheon holds ultimate sway within its own sphere of influence (if it is uncontested). Priests from other pantheons may cross into its sphere of influence, receive spells, and remain relatively unnoticed and unmolested by the deities whose sphere of influence they are in, provided they do not attempt to convert the inhabitants of the region, set up a temple, or engage in holy war. Any of these last activities provokes a pantheon to act in its own self-interest. At this point, most powers have their priesthoods or knightly/military orders take action to eject the foreign influence (most good and nuetral deities) or expunge it (most evil powers).. (pg 4).
Most deities are not going to care about a followers day-to-day activities, or the way in which they choose to worship (though many have basic rituals or preferred placings for their followers to leave offerings), so long as that action does not go against the dogma. Deities expect their clergy to uphold their values (again, some more rigidly than others), but they aren't watching your every single move. This is one of the point's of prayer--it gets the deity's attention (and why some cringe when certain names are invoked). A deity will take notice of "big moves", so to speak, but not every little thing. Some deities are also just more actively involved with their followers than others.
In regards to Vhaeraun: I agree, it's bad writing, and there was no explanation for the change. It was treated (written) as if that was the way it has always been. Really, that's how MToF treated all the ridicluous changes to the drow lore.
|
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 21 Jun 2018 : 03:57:21
Yup, Mask appeared to Cale, disguised at first as a beggar, then revealing himself. He let Cale attack him a bit, to vent frustration, then put a stop to it lol. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 19 Jun 2018 : 15:18:58
quote:
Originally posted by Balmar Foghaven
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Aside from Mystra and her Chosen, even the most powerful priest will never speak directly with their deity -- at least, not while that priest is still alive.
And Mask, apparently. IIRC, he allowed Erevis Cale to stab him repeatedly to vent some frustrations.
I do not recall that. Not doubting you; just saying I don't remember that from my one reading of those books. I was not a fan of the Erevis Cale books. |
| Balmar Foghaven |
Posted - 19 Jun 2018 : 13:49:00
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Aside from Mystra and her Chosen, even the most powerful priest will never speak directly with their deity -- at least, not while that priest is still alive.
And Mask, apparently. IIRC, he allowed Erevis Cale to stab him repeatedly to vent some frustrations. |
| Storyteller Hero |
Posted - 19 Jun 2018 : 07:09:43
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
No one is trying to have both sides of an argument. The new lore about Vhaeraun is entirely contrary to prior lore about Vhaeraun. The argument there is that the new canon is almost a 180 degree turn from the old canon. It'd be like making Bane the god of puppies and sharing.
Bane's pet corgi, Lord Wuffles, is the most feared entity in the Black Bastion. Legend has it he once had a white cat, but it set off his allergies.
The cat became the Cat Lord thanks to the power of divine snot, and waits longingly for Daddy Bane to come back after being left to play with yarn...
|
| LordofBones |
Posted - 19 Jun 2018 : 03:18:17
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
No one is trying to have both sides of an argument. The new lore about Vhaeraun is entirely contrary to prior lore about Vhaeraun. The argument there is that the new canon is almost a 180 degree turn from the old canon. It'd be like making Bane the god of puppies and sharing.
Bane's pet corgi, Lord Wuffles, is the most feared entity in the Black Bastion. Legend has it he once had a white cat, but it set off his allergies. |
| Demzer |
Posted - 19 Jun 2018 : 00:09:54
Just for future reference, if anyone wants to know anything about Bast/Sharess please disregard the "pertaining" references in this thread (which are not based on anything even remotely related to canon information) and go to this old repository of knowledge:
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=12963
Thanks.
I'm out, but I'll come back in to say if and when someone is utterly wrong on other points and this is not promptly pointed out by other Scribes. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 22:30:33
True, but Sharess was changed because we know that Shar acted on her, and it was a short-lived change. For Helm, he actually suffered the consequences of his clerics going awry, but it was in the form of loss of followers. He--personally--didn't change that much (he has never been goodly, he's always been LN). OTOH, that I recall, the backlash that his church's reputation suffered forced them to work to recover, so the followers kinda had to make things clear and make sure to adhere more closely to the true teachings of Helm.
That said, I agree that a deity can change based on his followers' action (although I wouldn't say that it should be the only possible cause), but it should:
1)be a gradual change
2)I don't see a dramatic change that makes the god no longer themselves happening, simply because those who choose to mainly follow--say--a god of tyranny, aren't going to steer so far from that to become freedom fighters. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 22:17:58
I'm entirely in agreement that the recent changes are very poor quality world building.
However, at its most basic level we have a change in personality (Which lets face it is difficult enough to conceive of a human changing personality without mental illness or brain injury) which is different enough to be contrary to what is already stated. Bast changed from good/neutral to neutral/evil. Helm supposedly changed following maztica events. Bane 1.0 was different to Bane 2.0 and it never stated they were different beings (although I believe they are).
The only difference between the good and bad scenarios is the quality of writing and as a result the degree of the change. Either they are accepted or not, you can't justify one without the other except by arbitrary decision.
I personally disagree with the change to vhaeraun and so cannot justify personality changes for other gods (gradual or otherwisr) thus the changes in dogma have to be for another reason (a more people centric reason). |
| Irennan |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 21:03:41
Sharess didn't wake up one morning and said "yo, I'm gonna mess things up". Stuff happened that forced changes upon her, and it had consequences on her power, followers, etc... Not only that, but after her imprisonment by Shar, Sharess mostly returned to being her own self (the fact that she became an exarch of Sune doesn't make her character different).
For Vhaeraun, it's just a retcon, and that sort of things shouldn't be applauded as good writing because "mystery" IMO. It's blatantly disrespectful towards the character, the people who like the character, and the creators of the character (in this case, Ed himself). Even if you tried to explain this with the fact that he (almost) died and then returned, these changes would still make absolutely no sense. All things considered, Vhaeraun didn't lose to Lolth, and the kind of influence that he could have received wouldn't make him any less hostile to Lolth. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 20:58:27
And there comes the problem, can a god suddenly decide to change everything it represents? That causes more problems than it solves if existing worshippers do not agree with the new dogma. The deity then has to try recruiting people open to its new (and undeclared dogma) to ensure it doesn't suddenly have no worshippers when he suddenly changes behavior and personality.
Vhaeraun suddenly says "actually I quite like Lolth". Vhaeraun's worshippers say "no way, we've been killing these lolthites for centuries and they have committed uncounted atrocities, why would I suddenly start helping them?". Now Vhaeraun is at risk of dropping massively in power.
This isn't the only time something like this has happened. Bast/Sharess goes from a lieutenant of Anhur and dance goddess to a nihilistic pleasure seeker serving Shar to a dancer and servant of Sune.
Drastic changes in dogma always risk causing problems among the established clergy unless of course they are clergy led changes in dogma. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 20:44:11
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
The problem is that gods if a god is dependant upon a portfolio and obedience of worshippers and have the option to control people to the degree that many believe then they would almost certainly do so.
Tyr is the god of law, he cannot allow his faithful to break the law and will prevent and punish those that try. Vhaeraun cannot allow his church to suddenly change into something that supports Lolth and so it cannot happen otherwise Vhaeraun vastly loses his power and risks deific death.
If a being has the power to be aware of almost anything and achieve almost anything then they will almost certainly do so to preserve their own existence.
Or the alternative is that they are not all aware and people can generally behave as they desire allowing all manner of people into a church (the greedy and self serving, the normal and unsure, and the fanatically pious). All a god can do is try and influence things to their desire through signs and portents and the occasional divine servant.
They changed Vhaeraun's own character, not only his followers. So, he wouldn't suffer from divine death, he's simply a different being now, according to WotC. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 20:37:52
Why the deity's reaction must always be that destructive? First off, gods almost never physically attack mortals because that would lead to an utter mess, with other gods stepping in to stop the act, and the prime being devastated for such things (this is Hallowed Ground's explanation). For a large heresy, the deity could start with various signs and dreams, and whatever to indicate that something is wrong. In the worst cases the deity might simply stop granting spells and favors to the heretical clerics. As I said before, the heresy could still go on, and become problematic.
quote:
Just have another, enemy deity (or Archdevil, or Demon Lord, or whatever) support it while posing as the main god. That way, even though--say--Selune could be able to disapprove of her followers killing in her name, stop granting spell, etc... (like a good-hearted deity would, because this whole good deities being actually a******s in disguise is honestly tiresome) Shar could secretly support the heretics and even fuel a Shar=Selune heresy, without WotC coming down and saying "Shar has been Selune all along!!!11 Oh, there are 3435564355 problems with this? Well, the gods are mysteeeeerious"
The difference is that you're still getting your conflict, you have one more thing to find out (who's manipulating the heretics), and Selune doesn't come off as an ever-absent deity who still grants spell to people who go around murdering in her name. I mean, some folks might fall for the trick, which is precisely what Shar could be aiming at ("oh look, those Selunite clerics are blasting people apart with their goddess' magic", when in truth the spells were granted by Shar), but you don't get a narrative that craps on Selune and her followers.
As for the critical mass: that's something that doesn't need to be set in stone, but an order of magnitude could be given. F&P provides a minimum number for the divine sense of each "tier" of deity (for lesser deities, for example, is 500 people doing a portfolio-related action at once).
Assuming that what you said about Vhaeraun is true (i.e. Lolth can see every drow because drow is in her portfolio, so Vhaeraunites count too).
1)Lolth would perceive so many things at once (basically, every action that the drow make?) that she would probably have a hard time even distinguishing what's going on. Also, divine sense doesn't grant you sight of what's happening, just the awareness that something is happening.
2) As I said before, my idea of a god's intervention isn't that as soon as some of their followers begin to abandon them, they should suddenly know the position of such followers and directly intervene. It's when a large enough number of followers start making actions in the god's name that are in stark contrast with their portfolio, then yes, the god should be able to notice.
3)Vhaeraun's portfolio (drow males is among it) is more specific than Lolth's, so generally that means that he would be able to hide drow from her.
4)Even setting aside matters of portfolio, Vhaeraun is able to hide Lolth's own clerics from her gaze (Masked Traitors), and to let them pose as Lolthites while serving him. Why wouldn't he be able to hide lay worshipers?
5)Even Eilistraee is able to hide her worshipers from Lolth (see the Promenade, and what happened in Starlights and Shadows before Liriel unwillingly brought Lolth's gaze past the wards), and Vhaeraun is more powerful than she is.
@Storyteller Hero: MToF doesn't mention what happened to the church of Vhaeraun in the past, and it clearly states that the majority of his followers are complacent with taking part into the very society and infighting that they're supposed to stop. Even his belief in gender equality is now "an assumption" that some of his followers make, and only because he's apparently Lolth's favorite son? Lol? It even describes the idea of Vhaeraun as embodying the "silent and obedient" aspects of the drow male. The fact that his followers are now normally accepted among Lolthites (and simply try to keep their ideas to themselves) points to him becoming more and more like Selvetarm. However, this discussion belongs to the MToF thread. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 20:32:43
The problem is that gods if a god is dependant upon a portfolio and obedience of worshippers and have the option to control people to the degree that many believe then they would almost certainly do so.
Tyr is the god of law, he cannot allow his faithful to break the law and will prevent and punish those that try. Vhaeraun cannot allow his church to suddenly change into something that supports Lolth and so it cannot happen otherwise Vhaeraun vastly loses his power and risks deific death.
If a being has the power to be aware of almost anything and achieve almost anything then they will almost certainly do so to preserve their own existence.
Or the alternative is that they are not all aware and people can generally behave as they desire allowing all manner of people into a church (the greedy and self serving, the normal and unsure, and the fanatically pious). All a god can do is try and influence things to their desire through signs and portents and the occasional divine servant. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 20:24:42
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Many times I've seen people on this forum shout down another's idea saying that God x wouldn't allow it because it goes against the portfolio or ideals of that God. If the God has the omniscience to know about it and the power to stop it then how can any deviance be allowed.
The church of vhaeraun is now subservient to lolth and his priests protect the lolthites and yet already it has been argued that this could not happen because vhaeraun himself would not allow it.
I proposed subverting the power of an artefact for good to evil and was told gods would not allow it.
You can't have both sides of the argument. If a god can control organisations and events and people to stop what others want to develop then it also cannot allow the schism already existing. Or alternatively a god has no control and it is all up to individual people and everything can change and be warped.
No one is trying to have both sides of an argument. The new lore about Vhaeraun is entirely contrary to prior lore about Vhaeraun. The argument there is that the new canon is almost a 180 degree turn from the old canon. It'd be like making Bane the god of puppies and sharing.
Complaining about reversing prior lore is not at all the same thing as saying a deity might or might not allow something.
You're arguing that gods are either the ultimate micromanagers, watching every single thing every single one of their worshipers does, 24/10, or that they have absolutely no control over anything whatsoever. You're saying it's either all or nothing, black or white, when every bit of information we've ever had about the deities of the Realms firmly establishes that it's somewhere in the middle.
Again, I get that you can't stand the gods -- you've trumpeted that one more than enough times. But it is clear that you've never read anything about them, since you keep making these false assumptions and arguments. Perhaps you should take the time to properly research them before you pass judgement. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 20:16:18
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Many times I've seen people on this forum shout down another's idea saying that God x wouldn't allow it because it goes against the portfolio or ideals of that God. If the God has the omniscience to know about it and the power to stop it then how can any deviance be allowed.
The church of vhaeraun is now subservient to lolth and his priests protect the lolthites and yet already it has been argued that this could not happen because vhaeraun himself would not allow it.
I proposed subverting the power of an artefact for good to evil and was told gods would not allow it.
You can't have both sides of the argument. If a god can control organisations and events and people to stop what others want to develop then it also cannot allow the schism already existing. Or alternatively a god has no control and it is all up to individual people and everything can change and be warped.
Small heresies can easily go under the radar, but if a heresy gets large, then yes: the deity is bound to notice and to do something, because the deity does indeed stand for certain ideals and values, they are strongly tied to them, and it only makes sense for them to act when things get out of hand in large numbers. Otherwise, what would even be the point of having deities as entities? At that point, if deities are to be permanently inactive, just have RL-like religion and be done with it. Personally, I don't like it, and the Realms have never been like RL.
The thing about Vhaeraun is not just that he wouldn't allow it, it's that his own character has been demolished, and all that he and his followers have always been, all of sudden started doing the *exact opposite*. Seriously, "silent, obedient" to describe Vhaeraun&followers? You might as well have an entirety different character. Besides, the large problem is that such BS was extended to his whole faith, not just a bunch of dissidents.
That said, I apologize if it seemed that I shot you down, I didn't mean to. I was just replying to your claim.
Don't worry about it, I wasn't referring to me personally, but there is a general embarge on discussing anything godly that is contrary to portfolio or alignment because it is quite quickly shot down. I don't really discuss anything godly anymore, only religions.
But if a heresy is shot down when it gets too large it, what is the critical mass for a heresy to become visible. We have no details on the size of the heresies in canon but the heresy of grazzt and waukeen is potentially quite large. When they get suitably large what happens, do all the members suddenly immolate in divine fire or are all faithful worshippers immediately alerted to their presence and ordered to slay them. If this is the case then why would anyone ever bother founding a heresy because the moment they have a chance of becoming successful they are destroyed. Vhaeraun's entire faith could be considered a heresy if not for the fact that it only recruits members excluded from Lolth's church (men) but the drow as a whole could be considered part of lolth's portfolio and thus she would be aware of all vhaeraunites in lolth controlled settlements.
Its just too messy to consider if a god has that level of knowledge and control over mortal affairs. Subtle whisperings is the only way to go (likely to be ignored or dismissed as dreams as they are obeyed).
The scenario of Vhaeraunites becoming subservient would make more sense if the lolthites changed tactics from eradicating the church of vhaeraun to infiltrating it and slowly gaining position and eliminating the upper hierarchy until it was mostly filled with polymorphed female drow who then gradually change the ideology of cells within major lolth settlements to seek change in society by secretly and then openly supporting the lolthites and trying to gain the legality of positions for males within Lolth's church.
The success of such a tactic is proved when priests of vhaeraun are allowed to exist and actually guard lolth's temples. The vhaeraunites in major lolth settlements now follow the new doctrine of change from within while those in non lolth settlements still follow the old way.
All this could have happened while Vhaeraun was dead (although I merged him with eilistraee to make the Masked Lady) and the inevitable chaos that follows.
Vhaeraun is using visions and dreams to try and change the church back to its old ways. But If gods cannot allow things to happen contrary to their nature and have such control over mortals then many of the events in FR become contradictory to the nature of the setting.
|
| Storyteller Hero |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 19:54:18
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Many times I've seen people on this forum shout down another's idea saying that God x wouldn't allow it because it goes against the portfolio or ideals of that God. If the God has the omniscience to know about it and the power to stop it then how can any deviance be allowed.
The church of vhaeraun is now subservient to lolth and his priests protect the lolthites and yet already it has been argued that this could not happen because vhaeraun himself would not allow it.
I proposed subverting the power of an artefact for good to evil and was told gods would not allow it.
You can't have both sides of the argument. If a god can control organisations and events and people to stop what others want to develop then it also cannot allow the schism already existing. Or alternatively a god has no control and it is all up to individual people and everything can change and be warped.
The church of Vhaeraun is not subservient to Lolth. The general propaganda might have people thinking that Vhaeraun serves Lolth, but the real Vhaeraunites plot the downfall of Lolth. This was established with the church of Vhaeraun pursuing the death of Lolth, then being absorbed into Eilistraee's church, then being taken care of by Corellon for about a hundred years.
It was even pointed out that subservience was propaganda in MtoF, and the passage on Vhaeraun in the book makes sure not to say that all worshippers of Vhaeraun believe this.
|
| Irennan |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 19:48:25
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Many times I've seen people on this forum shout down another's idea saying that God x wouldn't allow it because it goes against the portfolio or ideals of that God. If the God has the omniscience to know about it and the power to stop it then how can any deviance be allowed.
The church of vhaeraun is now subservient to lolth and his priests protect the lolthites and yet already it has been argued that this could not happen because vhaeraun himself would not allow it.
I proposed subverting the power of an artefact for good to evil and was told gods would not allow it.
You can't have both sides of the argument. If a god can control organisations and events and people to stop what others want to develop then it also cannot allow the schism already existing. Or alternatively a god has no control and it is all up to individual people and everything can change and be warped.
Small heresies can easily go under the radar, but if a heresy gets large, then yes: the deity is bound to notice and to do something, because the deity does indeed stand for certain ideals and values, they are strongly tied to them, and it only makes sense for them to act when things get out of hand in large numbers. Otherwise, what would even be the point of having deities as entities? At that point, if deities are to be permanently inactive, just have RL-like religion and be done with it. Personally, I don't like it, and the Realms have never been like RL.
The thing about Vhaeraun is not just that he wouldn't allow it, it's that his own character has been demolished, and all that he and his followers have always been, all of sudden started doing the *exact opposite*. Seriously, "silent, obedient" to describe Vhaeraun&followers? You might as well have an entirety different character. Besides, the large problem is that such BS was extended to his whole faith, not just a bunch of dissidents.
That said, I apologize if it seemed that I shot you down, I didn't mean to. I was just replying to your claim. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 19:07:55
Many times I've seen people on this forum shout down another's idea saying that God x wouldn't allow it because it goes against the portfolio or ideals of that God. If the God has the omniscience to know about it and the power to stop it then how can any deviance be allowed.
The church of vhaeraun is now subservient to lolth and his priests protect the lolthites and yet already it has been argued that this could not happen because vhaeraun himself would not allow it.
I proposed subverting the power of an artefact for good to evil and was told gods would not allow it.
You can't have both sides of the argument. If a god can control organisations and events and people to stop what others want to develop then it also cannot allow the schism already existing. Or alternatively a god has no control and it is all up to individual people and everything can change and be warped. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 18:31:27
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Well the point was not really about holy war it was about possibilities arising out of difference that cannot happen under the current model.
Under the current model everyone worships the God in the exact same way because all priests preach in the exact same way because they were told to do so by the God himself.
It is difficult to conceive how heretical cults can exist under the current model because the God has direct control of his church and will not allow any action (such as inter religious strife) unless it is part of his portfolio, plus that God can hear any time his name is invoked and read the thoughts of anyone invoking his name (and heretic priests must invoke his name if masquerading as a legitimate worshipper).
It all depends on how you like your game. The current God centric model fits very nicely with the bland 5e where everything is black or white and in large single colour codes blocks (all orcs are evil, all lolth worshippers do x, all shadovar look like y, all people from cormyr behave in such a manner).
I like my games to be as realistic as possible where every organisation is filled with nice people and selfish people and the occasional psychopath, where people try and better themselves sometimes by screwing over superiors or underlings. Where people in power are generally there because they exploited their way to the top and are the least worthy of that power. Intrigue and lies abound and yet through it all good endures and sometimes succeeds (but not all the time).
As usual, you misrepresent divine matters in the Realms. It is clearly not the case that all worshipers of a deity worship the same way, because there are heresies, schisms, and simple regional variations in worship -- and these are all documented in canon Realmslore.
The error is in persisting in thinking that gods have nothing better to do than hang out in their temples having tea with their ranking clergy. This also goes against canon Realmslore, which specifies the ways that deities indicate favor or disfavor. Aside from Mystra and her Chosen, even the most powerful priest will never speak directly with their deity -- at least, not while that priest is still alive.
The gods send signs of their favor or disfavor, and let the mortals follow their own free will. And most deities aren't going to quibble over minor variations in rituals and whatnot. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 18:31:01
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Well the point was not really about holy war it was about possibilities arising out of difference that cannot happen under the current model.
Under the current model everyone worships the God in the exact same way because all priests preach in the exact same way because they were told to do so by the God himself.
It is difficult to conceive how heretical cults can exist under the current model because the God has direct control of his church and will not allow any action (such as inter religious strife) unless it is part of his portfolio, plus that God can hear any time his name is invoked and read the thoughts of anyone invoking his name (and heretic priests must invoke his name if masquerading as a legitimate worshipper).
It all depends on how you like your game. The current God centric model fits very nicely with the bland 5e where everything is black or white and in large single colour codes blocks (all orcs are evil, all lolth worshippers do x, all shadovar look like y, all people from cormyr behave in such a manner).
I like my games to be as realistic as possible where every organisation is filled with nice people and selfish people and the occasional psychopath, where people try and better themselves sometimes by screwing over superiors or underlings. Where people in power are generally there because they exploited their way to the top and are the least worthy of that power. Intrigue and lies abound and yet through it all good endures and sometimes succeeds (but not all the time).
Why wouldn't people worship deities in their own way? As long as they don't go against the dogma of the deity, I don't see why no one could deviate from the standard style of worship.
Want a true heresy, complete with a schism? Sure! Just have another, enemy deity (or Archdevil, or Demon Lord, or whatever) support it while posing as the main god. That way, even though--say--Selune could be able to disapprove of her followers killing in her name, stop granting spell, etc... (like a good-hearted deity would, because this whole good deities being actually a******s in disguise is honestly tiresome) Shar could secretly support the heretics and even fuel a Shar=Selune heresy, without WotC coming down and saying "Shar has been Selune all along!!!11 Oh, there are 3435564355 problems with this? Well, the gods are mysteeeeerious" |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 18:22:04
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
It gets even better when the church of the great spaghetti mother and the church of the great oatmeal mother have the same holy scriptures and even the same iconography but they cannot abide that the other church uses the wrong name. Both churches then slaughter each other for using the wrong name until the true church of the great spaghetti monster wipes them both out for not using the right type of pasta at religious festivals.
This kind of stuff I don't personally find interesting, like at all. RL is already full of that kind of sh*t, unless the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a deity of war and carnage, of intolerance and violence, I don't see why conflicts over this sort of stuff should happen beyond the size of a handful of fanatical, empty-minded worshipers. Things like intolerance don't need to be IN YOUR FACE at any opportunity that remotely allows it.
Btw, I don't mind that some cultures worship the same deity under different names. What pisses me off is when, all of sudden, WoTC decides that deities that have always been separate entities "were actually the same all along!!11!!" Even when that makes absolutely no logical sense whatsoever (or when a deity decides to change their whole outlook overnight, or things like that). Consistency is not bad, I'm really puzzled that this notion is becoming so popular tbh.
If the 4e version had been "some elves believe that Selune is an aspect of Sehanine, and some humans believe that Sehanine is an aspect of Selune" I wouldn't have cared or minded. However, Sehanine=Selune, Sune=Hanali, Talos=Gruumsh, and so on don't make sense at all, and I'm glad to see that kind of stuff re-retconned again.
That was my beef. We had it well-established that these deities were all separate, and then it was suddenly, out of the blue, "these kinda-sorta similar deities are actually the same one, even if that violates prior canon!"
Add to that the fact that their excuse for making this change was that there was too many deities in the Realms -- but then they added more, while giving us that lame excuse. More than anything, that indicates to me that the only reason for the change was for designer convenience. Why ask designers to differentiate between Deity A and Deity B when you can wave your hand and say they're the same deity? Like so much other Spellplague-era lore, it seems to me that the only objective was making sure the designers didn't have to do any research beyond cracking open a single book. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 18:10:27
Well the point was not really about holy war it was about possibilities arising out of difference that cannot happen under the current model.
Under the current model everyone worships the God in the exact same way because all priests preach in the exact same way because they were told to do so by the God himself.
It is difficult to conceive how heretical cults can exist under the current model because the God has direct control of his church and will not allow any action (such as inter religious strife) unless it is part of his portfolio, plus that God can hear any time his name is invoked and read the thoughts of anyone invoking his name (and heretic priests must invoke his name if masquerading as a legitimate worshipper).
It all depends on how you like your game. The current God centric model fits very nicely with the bland 5e where everything is black or white and in large single colour codes blocks (all orcs are evil, all lolth worshippers do x, all shadovar look like y, all people from cormyr behave in such a manner).
I like my games to be as realistic as possible where every organisation is filled with nice people and selfish people and the occasional psychopath, where people try and better themselves sometimes by screwing over superiors or underlings. Where people in power are generally there because they exploited their way to the top and are the least worthy of that power. Intrigue and lies abound and yet through it all good endures and sometimes succeeds (but not all the time). |
| Irennan |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 17:28:17
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
It gets even better when the church of the great spaghetti mother and the church of the great oatmeal mother have the same holy scriptures and even the same iconography but they cannot abide that the other church uses the wrong name. Both churches then slaughter each other for using the wrong name until the true church of the great spaghetti monster wipes them both out for not using the right type of pasta at religious festivals.
This kind of stuff I don't personally find interesting, like at all. RL is already full of that kind of sh*t, unless the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a deity of war and carnage, of intolerance and violence, I don't see why conflicts over this sort of stuff should happen beyond the size of a handful of fanatical, empty-minded worshipers. Things like intolerance don't need to be IN YOUR FACE at any opportunity that remotely allows it.
Btw, I don't mind that some cultures worship the same deity under different names. What pisses me off is when, all of sudden, WoTC decides that deities that have always been separate entities "were actually the same all along!!11!!" Even when that makes absolutely no logical sense whatsoever (or when a deity decides to change their whole outlook overnight, or things like that). Consistency is not bad, I'm really puzzled that this notion is becoming so popular tbh.
If the 4e version had been "some elves believe that Selune is an aspect of Sehanine, and some humans believe that Sehanine is an aspect of Selune" I wouldn't have cared or minded. However, Sehanine=Selune, Sune=Hanali, Talos=Gruumsh, and so on don't make sense at all, and I'm glad to see that kind of stuff re-retconned again. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 16:40:55
It gets even better when the church of the great spaghetti mother and the church of the great oatmeal mother have the same holy scriptures and even the same iconography but they cannot abide that the other church uses the wrong name. Both churches then slaughter each other for using the wrong name until the true church of the great spaghetti monster wipes them both out for not using the right type of pasta at religious festivals.
Of course the canon way is much more interesting where every priest is in direct communication with their God and knows exactly what he wants and so there is never any internal religious strife and anytime anyone does anything remotely against the gods wishes they lose all abilities (although the idea of every priest casting spells is equally ridiculous).
Some of what was written above may involve sarcasm. |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 15:56:50
Worship is worship and a name is a name. Don't see any issue with halflings worshipping the Great Spaghetti Monster and calling it the Great Oatmeal Monster. In fact it makes for a more fascinating religious landscape.
-- George Krashos |
| Irennan |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 13:18:55
quote:
Originally posted by TomCosta
Set became Zehir in 4E to survive as one of the Faerunian pantheon.
That said, I like how the gods have morphed between editions. I think it keeps them more mysterious as they should be and opens up tons of potential storylines. Are Sehanine and Selune the same or Talos and Gruumsh or Helm and the related demihuman god of almost every pantheon or Lathander and Amaunator? Could be, might not. Do faithful who follow heresies still get divine power, seemingly so, but from where? What about the faithful of dead gods? What really happens to the faithless and false? What happens to the souls of the dead? Is the Raven Queen involved, what about Myrkul, Jergal, and Kelemvor? Do they go through the Shadowfell or the Fugue Plane or where? Malyk a separate god now or Zandilar? Is Moander back? Is Entropy a god? What's the difference between a god, primordial and the most ancient beings of the Far Realm? What about archfey and lords of Ravenloft? And what exactly are the githyanki and other creatures building their homes on in the Astral Plane? Is Anubis still guarding them and why? What about the gods of Oerth and Greyhawk; do they exist in the Realms? Are Ptah and Celestian worshiped in Realmspace? Who is Ao and does he even exist? Are the outer planes a tree or a great wheel? Can a mortal really kill a god and how does one become a god? And on and on and on. The thing is these paradoxes existed within the editions too, not just between them.
There are a hundred and one answers and a story in each. Schism and opportunities everywhere, and a chance for players to find the right divine concept (if that's what they are looking for) no matter what it is without being wrong and DM's to come up with some pretty cool stories for those very same players.
There are ways to add mystery without showing an utter lack of care for continuity (or the setting at all). Lack of internal consistency is not, and has never been, good writing (and by this I don't mean mortals having a wrong perception in novels or tales, it's--like it has happened in the past--arbitrary changes rained down from WotC's Devs). |
| Irennan |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 13:11:38
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
The problem with a lot of the whole "let's keep the higher planes a mystery huehuehue" is that people have actually gone on and explored these places, interviewed their denizens and in some cases opened up settlements. Hell, there are many deities who allow visitors into their domains as long as they keep the peace; Sung Chiang rules over the greatest black market in the planes, while Waukeen's realm is one of four of the greatest trading centers in the planes.
It's when you want to keep your players constantly guessing that the whole thing falls apart. What's the point of planar lore if everything gets reshuffled every edition? There are only so many cataclysms the Realms can take.
Yep. Once you have a history of planes being explored, and their denizens being interacted with, the "it's mysterious" approach sounds like sloppy worldbuilding--at best--to me (*especially* when it only applies to some, and others keep receiving plenty of focus, and others yet keep showing up to mortals, etc...) |
| Barastir |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 11:35:10
quote:
Originally posted by Storyteller Hero
There is also a goddess named Selan the Beautiful Moon in the lands of Zakhara, (...) likely either an aspect of Selune or Selune herself with a slightly different name.
Sure. In the same planet of the Realms, so technically Selūne is still in one world only!  |
| LordofBones |
Posted - 18 Jun 2018 : 07:10:39
The problem with a lot of the whole "let's keep the higher planes a mystery huehuehue" is that people have actually gone on and explored these places, interviewed their denizens and in some cases opened up settlements. Hell, there are many deities who allow visitors into their domains as long as they keep the peace; Sung Chiang rules over the greatest black market in the planes, while Waukeen's realm is one of four of the greatest trading centers in the planes.
It's when you want to keep your players constantly guessing that the whole thing falls apart. What's the point of planar lore if everything gets reshuffled every edition? There are only so many cataclysms the Realms can take. |
|
|
