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
 Running the Realms
 What is evil?

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
n/a Posted - 03 Nov 2019 : 17:24:07
Subject old as dnd alignement system maybe even more who knows?
Having a paladin of Tyr in my party I started to ponder more what will come at his faces. Lots of creature such as the umber hulk (CE) are aligned. But how could they be aligned without enough consciousness to understand that concept?

I really feels that what actually defines what is what is how the god supervising the creature is aligned with other gods. (like right or left politicaly. It's juste based on where you sat at the cafeteria)
In the same category there is the "create undead" by the cleric. Thorm be like "undead not cool except when we create them (eat that cyric)"

Just wondering how do you deal with alignement problematic? What fun case you encountered etc?
26   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
cpthero2 Posted - 05 Mar 2020 : 05:45:41
Great Reader CorellonsDevout,

Great reference with that quote. I think I have seen you post it in other places as well. It is spot on. I'm glad I was on the same track as Ed with my outlook. I feel it does make sense! :)

Best regards,




quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout

quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2



The disagreement I offer to that consideration is what appears to be an overabundant amount of involvement of the deities of the Realms in everyone's daily lives. Not everyone worships a deity, but may pay respects to one as they may interface with the deities domain. For example, if one were to board a boat to go fishing in to the Sea of Swords, any smart person aboard that vessel would toss a coin into the sea to appease the Bitch Queen, for fear of attaining her wrath. Many of those people likely do not actively worship her, but they know that they are in her backyard, so don't piss her off basically. This is how people back in the Roman and Greek times often did it. One person may venerate Jupiter in Rome but still offer a prayer to Neptune when out on the ocean, just as a person may venerate Demeter in Greece for good crops as a farmer, but respects Hermes enough to keep the thieves away on his trip to sell his crop at the market.

I think it would likely come down to people coming to their own ethical, and thus moral, outlooks in life by acculturating to the culture they are from and thereby, find a deity who makes aligns with their outlooks in life. I hate to use the dreaded align word there, but it was apropos.




I've quoted it before, but this is along the lines of what Elminster's Forgotten Realms says (and I think the F&A says something similar):

Almost all beings in Faerun worship many gods; as a rule, only zealots and clergy venerate just one deity. In other words, a farmer could mainly worship Chauntea, but also pray to appease Talos to keep crop-damaging storms away, Malar to keep beasts from attacking him or his folk in the fields and send vermin elsewhere, Talona to keep disease and blight away, and so on.

....The average Faerunian leaves long enough to worship (or serve through one's actions) one deity above all others--though in many cases, which deity a given person has served most might not be clear to a dying mortal or anyone else...he ends up in the afterlife serving the deity most appropriate to his moral and ethical outlook
(pg 132-3).

CorellonsDevout Posted - 05 Mar 2020 : 01:42:21
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2



The disagreement I offer to that consideration is what appears to be an overabundant amount of involvement of the deities of the Realms in everyone's daily lives. Not everyone worships a deity, but may pay respects to one as they may interface with the deities domain. For example, if one were to board a boat to go fishing in to the Sea of Swords, any smart person aboard that vessel would toss a coin into the sea to appease the Bitch Queen, for fear of attaining her wrath. Many of those people likely do not actively worship her, but they know that they are in her backyard, so don't piss her off basically. This is how people back in the Roman and Greek times often did it. One person may venerate Jupiter in Rome but still offer a prayer to Neptune when out on the ocean, just as a person may venerate Demeter in Greece for good crops as a farmer, but respects Hermes enough to keep the thieves away on his trip to sell his crop at the market.

I think it would likely come down to people coming to their own ethical, and thus moral, outlooks in life by acculturating to the culture they are from and thereby, find a deity who makes aligns with their outlooks in life. I hate to use the dreaded align word there, but it was apropos.




I've quoted it before, but this is along the lines of what Elminster's Forgotten Realms says (and I think the F&A says something similar):

Almost all beings in Faerun worship many gods; as a rule, only zealots and clergy venerate just one deity. In other words, a farmer could mainly worship Chauntea, but also pray to appease Talos to keep crop-damaging storms away, Malar to keep beasts from attacking him or his folk in the fields and send vermin elsewhere, Talona to keep disease and blight away, and so on.

....The average Faerunian leaves long enough to worship (or serve through one's actions) one deity above all others--though in many cases, which deity a given person has served most might not be clear to a dying mortal or anyone else...he ends up in the afterlife serving the deity most appropriate to his moral and ethical outlook
(pg 132-3).
cpthero2 Posted - 04 Mar 2020 : 23:36:19
Seeker Carter7Gindenv,

I was extremely happy to see this post. Thank you for making it! :)

Alignment is just a simplification of arguments that go back beyond the great minds of Greece, and come forward to today of course. Alignment is an attempt to understand the motivations, characteristics, and determinants of a persons decisions, through the lens of ethics, which inform a persons morals. The problem with alignment as you are clearly seeing is that it is devolving and narrowing quite possibly the most complicated and most hotly debated topic in all of humanity, and at least rivals the other one, death, which is: behavior. Why do people do what they do?

My outlook is that in order to answer your question considering options such as the field of ethics to make sense of behaviors is a great place to go.

I have studied this discipline a lot, and I feel it is a really great swap for the alignment system if you have a group of RP'ers that you can trust to not abuse the situation and really dive into the more thespian ends of the RP experience through their characters.

quote:
But how could they be aligned without enough consciousness to understand that concept?


This is simply a fantastic question. A philosopher (forgive me for referencing a real world philosopher, but as far as I know, Ed didn't start delving into philosophy and specifically ethical modeling in his writings) by the name of Thomas Acquinas studied what he called synderesis. It means that you have consciousness when you bring your principles to bear in a manner that you bring a rational outcome by your decisions. That is how he argued consciousness at least. Let's just assume that is the case now for a moment.

Does that Umber Hulk have consciousness? Does it have principles? Is it possible for that Umber Hulk to have rational thought, or is it unable to as let's say bacteria, form thought, but rather just acts on instinct?

Assuming that the Acquinas version of consciousness is valid (we can certainly do logical modeling to determine that validity and soundness, but that should be another thread I think), what rubric do we use to evaluate that? Do we capture an Umber Hulk and subject it to testing to really determine if it is in fact conscious? If it has principles, rational thought, and therefore is good, evil or perhaps none of the above? These are the kinds of questions you have to ask because knowing if something is conscious is, at least for most humans, an important qualifier for determining how you deal with it.

quote:
I really feels that what actually defines what is what is how the god supervising the creature is aligned with other gods.


I think I understand what you are getting at here, but please correct me if I misunderstood.

So, to be clear, it sounds like what you are implying is that a deity would evaluate a person's "alignment" if you will, by juxtaposing the actions of that person against the dogmatic edicts of another faiths deity and by process of removal, determine where this personal, ethically, aligns?

The disagreement I offer to that consideration is what appears to be an overabundant amount of involvement of the deities of the Realms in everyone's daily lives. Not everyone worships a deity, but may pay respects to one as they may interface with the deities domain. For example, if one were to board a boat to go fishing in to the Sea of Swords, any smart person aboard that vessel would toss a coin into the sea to appease the Bitch Queen, for fear of attaining her wrath. Many of those people likely do not actively worship her, but they know that they are in her backyard, so don't piss her off basically. This is how people back in the Roman and Greek times often did it. One person may venerate Jupiter in Rome but still offer a prayer to Neptune when out on the ocean, just as a person may venerate Demeter in Greece for good crops as a farmer, but respects Hermes enough to keep the thieves away on his trip to sell his crop at the market.

I think it would likely come down to people coming to their own ethical, and thus moral, outlooks in life by acculturating to the culture they are from and thereby, find a deity who makes aligns with their outlooks in life. I hate to use the dreaded align word there, but it was apropos.

quote:
In the same category there is the "create undead" by the cleric. Thorm be like "undead not cool except when we create them (eat that cyric)


This seems unnecessarily monolithic in nature. Consider this: Khelben "The Blackstaff" Arunsun upon his departure from the Harper's upon conviction of his crimes, creates the Moonstars. Included within that group are a vampire, and a city-wide crime lord who runs the entire crime syndicate in Athkatla. It doesn't take much for most people to realize, you are who you hang with. However, I know I've had many discussions with Master Rupert here on the site regarding the ethics of The Blackstaff, and Master Rupert feels that the good that The Blackstaff has done, outweighs the very horrific things he has done as well. I don't agree with him, but that is because I was arguing from a deontological perspective, and Master Rupert was clearly arguing from a teleological perspective, specifically Utilitarianism. Nothing wrong with that, but it did create one very interesting outcome:

Master Rupert believes The Blackstaff to be good (if I remember his position correctly: correct me if I am wrong Master Rupert), where as I consider him to be evil. That is how ethical modeling can be used to determine the nature of someone.

Anyhow, that is my take on it. Let me know what your thoughts are. I'd love to hear your response.

Best regards,






quote:
Originally posted by Carter7Gindenv

Subject old as dnd alignement system maybe even more who knows?
Having a paladin of Tyr in my party I started to ponder more what will come at his faces. Lots of creature such as the umber hulk (CE) are aligned. But how could they be aligned without enough consciousness to understand that concept?

I really feels that what actually defines what is what is how the god supervising the creature is aligned with other gods. (like right or left politicaly. It's juste based on where you sat at the cafeteria)
In the same category there is the "create undead" by the cleric. Thorm be like "undead not cool except when we create them (eat that cyric)"

Just wondering how do you deal with alignement problematic? What fun case you encountered etc?

CorellonsDevout Posted - 20 Dec 2019 : 05:03:12
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigley

Thank you for the quotes however it speaks mainly about problem of power over the same portfolio by more than one deity. I am more interested in situation where you have gods with different portfolio who are not known by people in the area of influence (and I realize now it was not clear from my post).



I think the same general principle applies to spheres of influence, regardless of whether portfolios are shared or not. I included the sharing of portfolios in the citation because I felt it gave a better idea about the spheres of influence. In an area where a deity isn't typically worshiped, a follower of that deity could still pray and speak of the deity, he just couldn't try and convert the populace or build a temple.

And again, this is mostly applied to human deities, though I'm sure the same rule applies to demihuman deities, but their spheres may overlap those of human deities, because of the location(s) of elves, dwarves, halflings, etc, who can be found at the very least throughout Faerun, if less so in other areas. In this instance, you would have the sharing of portfolios, to some extent, but it probably varies enough due to racial/cultural differences that non-human deities can get away with it. For example, Corellon and Mystra are both greater deities with magic in their portfolio, but whereas Corellon is the god of elven high magic, Mystra is the "mother of all magic", and governs the Weave. And, since the demihumans have their own pantheons, their deities' portfolios are going to overlap some with the human deities, and they may be sharing spheres of influence and portfolios (though they aren't always equal in status. Hanali and Sune are both goddesses of love, but Sune is a greater deity, and Hanali is either intermediate or lesser--can't remember off the top of my head).

(Using "human" for simplicity's sake, to help distinguish).
SaMoCon Posted - 20 Dec 2019 : 03:08:49
Not represented does not necessarily mean unknown or not worshipped. The denizens of Faerun know the gods exist because magic exists, their miracles are witnessed hundreds of times over, and they manifest from their servants to the gods themselves. They have a vital interest in all the deities because EVERYTHING is in the deities' interest. When Talona and Kiputytto battled each other for domination of the disease portfolio, they cast plagues into the ancient netherese city of Asram to induce the population to pray to them for relief in order to gain power; the plagues doomed the city but the clear connection of paying homage to a god for favor in that god's specialty is not restricted to the everyday worship. I have long contended that such prayer is common especially for those in positions of vulnerability & weakness versus some threat. A gambler suffering a long streak of lost bets stops praying for Tymora's blessing and starts praying to Beshaba to leave him alone. Why? Because the gods have their hand in everything or at the very least they are believed to do so in that moment.

Several gods encouraged this attitude even before the Time of Troubles with the most glaring example being Myrkul. Myrkul, god of the dead, would randomly appear at funerals to remind mortal creatures that he awaits them all, increasing their fear & his power simultaneously. Signs would appear of gods' interest in mortals whom have caught their attention to lead those mortal beings into new directions for weal or woe. This would cause the desperate to beseech gods of portfolios that would have a direct impact on their lives for succor, forgiveness, or just being overlooked. An example of this is the traditional tribute to Umberlee given by sailors as they prepare to embark on a voyage even though Umberlee is not written up in most coastal towns and regions.

The knowledge religion skill checks are more to recognize symbols, identify key details, or know the performances required for rituals of the gods as well as to weed out misconceptions, inaccuracies, or lies about myths & ethos of those gods. Individual common people in the FR may not be able to rattle off all the gods names unprompted but they will remember them when spoken because their histories are filled with the stories of the gods interfering in one fashion or another even if the instances are apocryphal or wildly inaccurate. And when the common people need help with that which their chosen deities seem unable or unwilling to help, they will turn to those powers that can do something.

At least, that is my interpretation of such.
Wrigley Posted - 19 Dec 2019 : 21:38:28
Thank you for the quotes however it speaks mainly about problem of power over the same portfolio by more than one deity. I am more interested in situation where you have gods with different portfolio who are not known by people in the area of influence (and I realize now it was not clear from my post).
I have tried to come up with an example but I found it really hard and in almost all of those cases (like Nobanion) there is a clear reason (competition with Lathander and Torm).
If I do not count Zakhara, Kara-Tur and possibly Mulhorand it seems it was only a feeling of nonrepresentation. It probably came from the summary of worship in location as there are usually 3-5 gods mentioned in the write up. If you sum the broader location there are many gods that are not represented at all there.
CorellonsDevout Posted - 19 Dec 2019 : 18:21:01
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigley


I think that should be basis for those local "pantheons" like calimshan, chultan, northern, netheries, ... it is not as much about what gods existed in that time but more about what gods did those people knew about and worshiped. There certainly were gods who were not gods yet in some moments of history like Deneir, Dead Three, Red Knight, ...

However I find it strange that there would be no attempt to spread the knowledge about some gods who clearly were existing at the time. I can see some gods having more influence in some areas but there must be a reason why some of them aren't even recognized as gods. If I were god I would certainly try to spread my faith to all areas I can reach even if I do not have the capacity to influence those people much...
Is there some way to keep other gods from certain area you have influence in? Is there a custom of dividing areas between gods?



I am sure gods have ways of spreading their knowledge, either via priests or other methods, especially since existence of the deities is common knowledge (even though your average Faerunian won't know about all of them). Knowledge of Cyric's ascendance spread fairly quickly, for example. It is likely several methods are used. I think knowledge is also spread by the very fact that it is a pantheon, and the worship of multiple gods is expected. Even though you may not know the names of all the gods, you are going to find out which ones are best aligned with you and your lifestyle (a ranger venerating Mielikki, Silvanus, and Eldath, for example). Most Faerunians do eventually settle on a sort of patron deity (though not to the extent a priest of cleric does). Maybe the aforementioned ranger leans more towards Eldath, but still pays respect to Silvanus and Mielikki.

Regarding areas of influence, I'll take quote F&A (I apologize for the text wall of quotes, but it explains it better than I can lol):

The powers active on Abeir-Toril have broken the surface of the world up into different areas over which they have spheres of influence. Different pantheon groups, for want of a better term, have dominion over different areas of the globe.. (It then lists areas like Kara-Tur, Mulhorand, Zakhara, etc).

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 a holy war...

When Abeir-Toril was young, the human deities of the Realms were not so formal about their spheres of influence because their worshipers were not so crowded together on the sphere of Toril as to likely ever encounter one another. For a long time, a human pantheon would simply stake out a claim on a continent or large geographic area uncontested. Entire human pantheons or subsets of pantheons from other crystal spheres found homes on the continents of Toril in this way. They did not worry about other human pantheons with deities who claimed similar portfolios living a whole continent away.

Eventually, though, pantheons started to see intermixture between their worshipers as various groups wandered across the face of Toril, and they began to worry about how to deal with the threat of their power base that such immigrations caused. As a solution to this, they agreed on the formation of the spheres of influence discussed above. Within these spheres of influence, while more than one deity may have similar portfolios, no more than one of such parallel powers can ascend in deific stature to a higher rank than demipower.

If a wave of transpheric immigration occurred (most often brought on by a gate opening), the mortals who emigrated to the Realms continued worshiping their old deities. If the Realms sphere of influence those people immigrated to already had powers who possessed the same portfolios as the immigrants' old powers, one of two things would normally happen: either the worship of the immigrants would go to the already-established Realms powers or the immigrant powers would cross to the new crystal sphere and battle with the old Realms' deities for control of the contested portfolio.
(pg 4).

This of course is mainly describing the human deities, as racial deities are liable to have similar portfolios to some of the human deities.
Wrigley Posted - 19 Dec 2019 : 16:11:15
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
Well, yes, as I said, people aren't going to know the details of every single deity (though I think mechanical numbers for game purposes are a bit different than "in house" lore that would actually be applied to the people "living" in the setting itself). I fully agree that your average Faerunian isn't going to know all the details and nuances of every single deity (not even priests know all the aims and workings of their own patron deity). I never said otherwise. It's like the lion example you started and I continued. They may have heard of a lion, perhaps even seen a picture of one somewhere, but they don't know anything else about it. It's true that your average Faerunian isn't going to have that much knowledge of all the deities--especially outside the ones they pay homage to--other than that they exist, and maybe a rough idea of their portfolio.

And, for more removed pantheons, like the Mulhorandi, yes, it is very likely most Faerunians outside of the Mulhorandi people don't know much, if anything, about the pantheon, other than that there is a Mulhorandi pantheon. I agree they probably couldn't name them or tell you their domains.

I also agree with your second statement that every mortal in the Realms knows of the importance of the gods and their existence, so that could be what the citation means, since it does say "believes in all the gods". So, even though they don't know all the gods by name or portfolio, they believe in them, because they know the gods are real. You're probably right in that meaning (I reread the citation. I may have misinterpreted it the first time).

And no, I cannot name all the deities lol. There is no way I could memorise them all. I am also not Faerunian, however, and don't have the "exposure" a Faerunian would. But all in all, I agree with your statement. I doubt your average Faerunain could name them all. Perhaps the main ones, maybe even the "head" of each racial pantheon (Moradin, Corellon, etc), but probably not the lesser known ones, or ones in a different land (Mulhurand, Kara-Tur).


Funny detail is that you personaly with access to books like Faiths & Pantheons have better access to those knowledges than common Faerunian and given your longterm interest in Realms I would say you have even studied it more then them. That is why I used that example - if you cannot even name all of them how could a simple farmer do that better? And I will surely also miss some if I tried :-)

I think that should be basis for those local "pantheons" like calimshan, chultan, northern, netheries, ... it is not as much about what gods existed in that time but more about what gods did those people knew about and worshiped. There certainly were gods who were not gods yet in some moments of history like Deneir, Dead Three, Red Knight, ...
However I find it strange that there would be no attempt to spread the knowledge about some gods who clearly were existing at the time. I can see some gods having more influence in some areas but there must be a reason why some of them aren't even recognized as gods. If I were god I would certainly try to spread my faith to all areas I can reach even if I do not have the capacity to influence those people much...
Is there some way to keep other gods from certain area you have influence in? Is there a custom of dividing areas between gods?

Btw. you could trim your replies of older posts. no need for half page reply of two sentences :-)
CorellonsDevout Posted - 19 Dec 2019 : 02:02:28
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigley

quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout

Found this entry in Elminster's Forgotten Realms:
Everyone in the Realms believes in all the gods, and so understands and accepts the purpose and major aims of every faith. This doesn't mean everyone necessarily agrees with or supports every religion, but that they tolerate and understand the place society each faith occupies.
Likewise, this does not mean every devout worshiper in a faith see eye to eye with every cleric.
(135-6).


I suspect they at least know of their existence, though likely not the details, especially of less common deities (based on the implications of this citation). They won't know the exact tenets of the faith, just the name of the god and a (rough) idea of what they stand for. This could be applied to most deities, I think. For example, most people know Mask as the god of trickery and thieves, but followers are going to know more details and nuances.

In far places, like Kara-Tur, where they have their own pantheon, they may have heard of the Faerunian deities, but they don't know much about them. To use the lion example, they may have heard of a lion (maybe even seen a picture), and thus know it exists, but don't know anything about it.

That would be my assumption, based on the implications of the citation.


Common human have Int 10 and no knowledge Religion skill. I think you put too much faith in interest of people in divine. The farmer in heartlands would know Chauntea, Tymora, Lathander, Kelemvor, Bane, Talos, Shar, Malar, Beshaba and probably heard about dozen more but I think he would not be able to even name any Mulhorandi god or tell who Ulutui is.

The citation meaning IMO is that every mortal in Realms realize importance of gods and know there are many of them (believe in their existence and meaning of the portfolios). To really understand purpose and major aims of all gods and their faiths you would have head like balloon. Can you personally at least name all Faerunian gods from your head without a book? You have certainly read about all of them so you should have even better knowledge than common peasant in Realms...



Well, yes, as I said, people aren't going to know the details of every single deity (though I think mechanical numbers for game purposes are a bit different than "in house" lore that would actually be applied to the people "living" in the setting itself). I fully agree that your average Faerunian isn't going to know all the details and nuances of every single deity (not even priests know all the aims and workings of their own patron deity). I never said otherwise. It's like the lion example you started and I continued. They may have heard of a lion, perhaps even seen a picture of one somewhere, but they don't know anything else about it. It's true that your average Faerunian isn't going to have that much knowledge of all the deities--especially outside the ones they pay homage to--other than that they exist, and maybe a rough idea of their portfolio.

And, for more removed pantheons, like the Mulhorandi, yes, it is very likely most Faerunians outside of the Mulhorandi people don't know much, if anything, about the pantheon, other than that there is a Mulhorandi pantheon. I agree they probably couldn't name them or tell you their domains.

I also agree with your second statement that every mortal in the Realms knows of the importance of the gods and their existence, so that could be what the citation means, since it does say "believes in all the gods". So, even though they don't know all the gods by name or portfolio, they believe in them, because they know the gods are real. You're probably right in that meaning (I reread the citation. I may have misinterpreted it the first time).

And no, I cannot name all the deities lol. There is no way I could memorise them all. I am also not Faerunian, however, and don't have the "exposure" a Faerunian would. But all in all, I agree with your statement. I doubt your average Faerunain could name them all. Perhaps the main ones, maybe even the "head" of each racial pantheon (Moradin, Corellon, etc), but probably not the lesser known ones, or ones in a different land (Mulhurand, Kara-Tur).
Wrigley Posted - 19 Dec 2019 : 01:30:34
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout

Found this entry in Elminster's Forgotten Realms:
Everyone in the Realms believes in all the gods, and so understands and accepts the purpose and major aims of every faith. This doesn't mean everyone necessarily agrees with or supports every religion, but that they tolerate and understand the place society each faith occupies.
Likewise, this does not mean every devout worshiper in a faith see eye to eye with every cleric.
(135-6).


I suspect they at least know of their existence, though likely not the details, especially of less common deities (based on the implications of this citation). They won't know the exact tenets of the faith, just the name of the god and a (rough) idea of what they stand for. This could be applied to most deities, I think. For example, most people know Mask as the god of trickery and thieves, but followers are going to know more details and nuances.

In far places, like Kara-Tur, where they have their own pantheon, they may have heard of the Faerunian deities, but they don't know much about them. To use the lion example, they may have heard of a lion (maybe even seen a picture), and thus know it exists, but don't know anything about it.

That would be my assumption, based on the implications of the citation.


Common human have Int 10 and no knowledge Religion skill. I think you put too much faith in interest of people in divine. The farmer in heartlands would know Chauntea, Tymora, Lathander, Kelemvor, Bane, Talos, Shar, Malar, Beshaba and probably heard about dozen more but I think he would not be able to even name any Mulhorandi god or tell who Ulutui is.

The citation meaning IMO is that every mortal in Realms realize importance of gods and know there are many of them (believe in their existence and meaning of the portfolios). To really understand purpose and major aims of all gods and their faiths you would have head like balloon. Can you personally at least name all Faerunian gods from your head without a book? You have certainly read about all of them so you should have even better knowledge than common peasant in Realms...
Dalor Darden Posted - 17 Dec 2019 : 17:47:27
Good, Evil, Law, Chaos and Neutrality are all cosmic forces. Alignments are based on which Cosmic Force an individual has aligned their life (and thus their fate) to. That is the AD&D explanation for it and why there are actual alignment languages and why you can actually lose an experience level if you change alignment.

Evil is a force. That is why it is “ok” to go into a dungeon and slaughter any evil found there and take their stuff.
CorellonsDevout Posted - 17 Dec 2019 : 17:37:19
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigley

quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout

Found this entry in Elminster's Forgotten Realms:


Everyone in the Realms believes in all the gods, and so understands and accepts the purpose and major aims of every faith. This doesn't mean everyone necessarily agrees with or supports every religion, but that they tolerate and understand the place society each faith occupies.
Likewise, this does not mean every devout worshiper in a faith see eye to eye with every cleric.
(135-6).

Alignments themselves aren't always straightforward, either, I don't think. You have the general "categories", so to speak, but I don't think it's so regimented that there isn't any flexibility. For example, Mask and Vhaeraun are technically evil aligned deities, but they aren't "evil" in the same way deities like Shar or Bane are often considered.


That citation brings in an interesting question. How much a commoner knows about ALL the gods? I would presume that there is only limited knowledge among them without any scholarly pursuit (knowledge Religion). I would say that most people know only local "pantheon" and only heard of most of the others if at all.
"I heard stories about southerners worshiping some lion king god. Do you know what a lion is?"



I suspect they at least know of their existence, though likely not the details, especially of less common deities (based on the implications of this citation). They won't know the exact tenets of the faith, just the name of the god and a (rough) idea of what they stand for. This could be applied to most deities, I think. For example, most people know Mask as the god of trickery and thieves, but followers are going to know more details and nuances.

In far places, like Kara-Tur, where they have their own pantheon, they may have heard of the Faerunian deities, but they don't know much about them. To use the lion example, they may have heard of a lion (maybe even seen a picture), and thus know it exists, but don't know anything about it.

That would be my assumption, based on the implications of the citation.
Wrigley Posted - 17 Dec 2019 : 14:37:01
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout

Found this entry in Elminster's Forgotten Realms:


Everyone in the Realms believes in all the gods, and so understands and accepts the purpose and major aims of every faith. This doesn't mean everyone necessarily agrees with or supports every religion, but that they tolerate and understand the place society each faith occupies.
Likewise, this does not mean every devout worshiper in a faith see eye to eye with every cleric.
(135-6).

Alignments themselves aren't always straightforward, either, I don't think. You have the general "categories", so to speak, but I don't think it's so regimented that there isn't any flexibility. For example, Mask and Vhaeraun are technically evil aligned deities, but they aren't "evil" in the same way deities like Shar or Bane are often considered.


That citation brings in an interesting question. How much a commoner knows about ALL the gods? I would presume that there is only limited knowledge among them without any scholarly pursuit (knowledge Religion). I would say that most people know only local "pantheon" and only heard of most of the others if at all.
"I heard stories about southerners worshiping some lion king god. Do you know what lion is?"

About that general categories like "evil" - you can find many categories for any group of subjects and it is always based on some common trait. In this case they are all kind of evil. Those categories will be always vague and generalizing. As you narrow the description of the group you are closing on reality but it is also less useful as the group gets smaller. Most precise group is one individual.
In case of Realms this alignment grouping is based on polarization of Outer planes where those axis are absolutely real and have consequences for anybody who is there.
Even on Toril you can die as a consequence of your alignment (spells that affect only certain alignment).
CorellonsDevout Posted - 17 Dec 2019 : 01:21:12
Found this entry in Elminster's Forgotten Realms:


Everyone in the Realms believes in all the gods, and so understands and accepts the purpose and major aims of every faith. This doesn't mean everyone necessarily agrees with or supports every religion, but that they tolerate and understand the place society each faith occupies.
Likewise, this does not mean every devout worshiper in a faith see eye to eye with every cleric.
(135-6).

Alignments themselves aren't always straightforward, either, I don't think. You have the general "categories", so to speak, but I don't think it's so regimented that there isn't any flexibility. For example, Mask and Vhaeraun are technically evil aligned deities, but they aren't "evil" in the same way deities like Shar or Bane are often considered.
LordofBones Posted - 17 Dec 2019 : 00:50:48
Alignments help in defining a god's ethos and personality, not to mention roleplaying his or her church. Good and evil gods despise each other because their goals are mutually incompatible, not because Bane is bad and Sune is good. I'd also argue that the location of their planar domains also help in fleshing out a god; there's a reason why Bane lives in Acheron and not Baator. Likewise, Myrkul hung around with many of his fellow underworld gods in the Waste; Mystra I's regimented and orderly approach to magic was reflected in her choice of domain on Regulus; Talos's gleefully destructive tendencies are fully expressed in Pandesmos; etc.
Wrigley Posted - 16 Dec 2019 : 17:10:56
quote:
Originally posted by SaMoCon

The problem I find with what was written at the http://easydamus.com/alignment.html website is that he makes the alignments an op-ed on society when it comes to law versus chaos when good versus evil were written as a personal perspective. In fact, he makes a point that lawful societies are nigh impermeable to innovation & change as a way of highlighting the differences between lawful & chaotic mindsets instead of the importance of the rights of other people in comparison to one's own rights. What does that mean for a player character out in the wilderness? If the characters are outside of societies then is the law-chaos axis utterly meaningless? And are chaotic characters really just arbitrary and irresponsible? Consider that elves are (for some reason) classified as chaotic as an aggregate yet their unchanging culture is the longest surviving in the Forgotten Realms history with rulers in power for centuries. This also classifies slackers as chaotic and the industrious as lawful. There are too many descriptors that are not homogenous to that one alignment type that creates inconsistencies like that. In fact, chaotic neutral as described better fits animal behaviors than neutral does. That's why I choose to view alignments as an ethos for which a character would hurt itself to promote & defend without reward, because it is their base desire to do so.

And why would that paladin be punished? In a no-win situation even gods recognize that the mortal limitations of paladins are not their fault - moreso if the gods have the power to punish the paladin but did not use any of that power to help those people by not even giving so much as a sign to the paladin that there might be another way. And why the paladin more than the local magistrate? The mid-wife? The town drunk? Or any of the other myriad people that allowed the situation to get to this point that a paladin is required to make that kind of a choice and is expected to be perfect?


Lets go a step back. If good deity is proclaiming you should sacrifice yourself to help others how come that they did have not done it yet? Are they punishing themselves for each such event? If not than it almost seems they are selfish and that is evil.
Some might say they see a bigger picture and try to do the most good possible. Than how come that paladin is punished for the same decision?
In my view gods are detached from alignments as it represents a faction they belong to and eternal war they are in. The war of ideology. They are not acting the ideology they are the ideology.
Ayrik Posted - 16 Dec 2019 : 07:03:05
But alignment is more than a social phenomenon.

It can also be very personal. It interests deities. It is often the "key" to activating or manifesting magics. It resonates with artifacts, places, species, dragons. It can even manipulate the Weave which embraces the Realms.

The Outer Planes (and their inhabitants) are tangible things made from the intangible stuff of fundamental alignments, just as the Inner Planes are composed of fundamental elements. While this doesn't directly impact Realmslore - indeed, most Planeslore has no place in the Realms - the fact is that fiends, celestials, and powers (from the aligned Outer Planes) do sometimes profoundly affect the landscape and history of Faerun.

A fiend is not just evil-aligned, it is made from evil, it feeds from evil, it creates and sustains and spreads evil wherever it exists, it is a living (super)natural expression and essence of evil itself. Evil takes many forms, some beyond mortal comprehensions, but look no further than fiends to see some of the most grotesque possibilities.
SaMoCon Posted - 16 Dec 2019 : 02:38:18
The problem I find with what was written at the http://easydamus.com/alignment.html website is that he makes the alignments an op-ed on society when it comes to law versus chaos when good versus evil were written as a personal perspective. In fact, he makes a point that lawful societies are nigh impermeable to innovation & change as a way of highlighting the differences between lawful & chaotic mindsets instead of the importance of the rights of other people in comparison to one's own rights. What does that mean for a player character out in the wilderness? If the characters are outside of societies then is the law-chaos axis utterly meaningless? And are chaotic characters really just arbitrary and irresponsible? Consider that elves are (for some reason) classified as chaotic as an aggregate yet their unchanging culture is the longest surviving in the Forgotten Realms history with rulers in power for centuries. This also classifies slackers as chaotic and the industrious as lawful. There are too many descriptors that are not homogenous to that one alignment type that creates inconsistencies like that. In fact, chaotic neutral as described better fits animal behaviors than neutral does. That's why I choose to view alignments as an ethos for which a character would hurt itself to promote & defend without reward, because it is their base desire to do so.

And why would that paladin be punished? In a no-win situation even gods recognize that the mortal limitations of paladins are not their fault - moreso if the gods have the power to punish the paladin but did not use any of that power to help those people by not even giving so much as a sign to the paladin that there might be another way. And why the paladin more than the local magistrate? The mid-wife? The town drunk? Or any of the other myriad people that allowed the situation to get to this point that a paladin is required to make that kind of a choice and is expected to be perfect?
TomCosta Posted - 16 Dec 2019 : 01:16:00
I find this website, which brings together the thoughts and opinions about the alignment system from various editions and Dragon articles into a cohesive whole is helpful. http://easydamus.com/alignment.html.

I would disagree that alignment is action based as stated earlier in the thread. I believe intent is more important. Someone can get maimed in an accident caused by another. That's not evil. Evil is intending to maim the other person in the first place and even staging it to look like an accident. That said, most people act for a variety of reasons making this all very complex in real life. There may be, and often is, a mix of altruistic and egoistic motivations. But in D&D games, we often have clearer motivation.

And all that doesn't mean that paladin who sacrifices innocents to save even more innocents won't get punished for not sacrificing themselves or finding another way, but then you are getting more into the shades of gray and the individual preferences of the paladin's faith.
SaMoCon Posted - 15 Dec 2019 : 07:00:21
In my games, I classify the alignments differently. The alignment is what your character would hurt themselves and their goals to do? Would passing up an opportunity to do what is their desire cause them to regret their missed actions? Before anyone jumps on the "that is forcing actions on the characters" bandwagon, YES it is a compulsion freely chosen by the players for their PCs. Alignments are giant flags telling me as the gamemaster how they want to play their characters. "Good" is an indicator to me that the player WANTS his character to be troubled by seeing a barely teenage boy selling himself into indentured servitude for money to save his widowed mother and little sister from begging in the streets. The same scenario for "Evil" would have the character ruing a lost opportunity for securing an exploitable asset that may be nurtured into a loyal minion. "Neutral" is defined as self-interest with no desire to act in a way that may bring harm to oneself for no clear reward. Thus a "Neutral" NPC would dash into a burning house to rescue a trapped child if there is a crowd of witnesses he wants to impress AND he thinks there is a way to safely do so, but if no one is around to witness or he feels the danger is to great he will make his excuses & shrug his shoulders helplessly. The same "Neutral" NPC witnessing a bully gang beating down the local night patrol before starting to loot the shops will run off to get help or just avoid the area, but if other alley bums or drunk malcontents pile into the growing riot he may join the lawlessness to vent his own frustrations & seize goods he could not or would not buy on his own. The "Law-Chaos" axis is a lot more personal as well, because it pertains to the perception of the character to his place in the social-relationship structures around himself. It is not laws but norms of actions expected of the character when that PC is NOT the most important person in that structure. A carefully counted tax collection bound for a fief's treasury to improve the land may be lighter if a "Chaotic" NPC was the courier because he felt the baron was rude to him even though there is a chance he will be found out. That "Chaotic" NPC's "Lawful" older brother would demand his younger sibling return the money or perform appropriate penance if he found out even if that would cause hardship for the both of them.

That all being said, the PCs & NPCs can restrain their desires. The players, at all times*, dictate their PCs' actions. NPCs may also perform actions outside of their alignment for which there is no reward & may certainly carry a mortal penalty; however, this is rare compared to the more likely impetus of a perceived reward that outweighs the risk or a foreign influence that interferes with rational thinking.

* Exceptions for effects & conditions that interfere with or seize control of the character, which the PC may incur during the course of play such as compulsions, charms, fear effects, various drugs & poisons, and many other situations & events too numerous to list.
Renin Posted - 08 Nov 2019 : 02:03:03
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas

What it Evil? Its this new show on CBS, with the guy that was playing Luke Cage on Netflix playing a guy that wants to be a priest who is researching miracles, possessions, hauntings, etc... for the Catholic Church... and some psychiatrist chick who is kinda hot who comes with a bunch of little girls that are totally going to get demonized.

ba da boom! Thank you! Thank you! I'll be here all week.



And remember to tip your waiters!
Wrigley Posted - 04 Nov 2019 : 14:56:19
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander

What is love?

Baby, don't hurt me.


Don't hurt me no more Whoa Oooh ;-)
Icelander Posted - 03 Nov 2019 : 23:47:24
What is love?

Baby, don't hurt me.
sleyvas Posted - 03 Nov 2019 : 22:09:29
What it Evil? Its this new show on CBS, with the guy that was playing Luke Cage on Netflix playing a guy that wants to be a priest who is researching miracles, possessions, hauntings, etc... for the Catholic Church... and some psychiatrist chick who is kinda hot who comes with a bunch of little girls that are totally going to get demonized.

ba da boom! Thank you! Thank you! I'll be here all week.
Wrigley Posted - 03 Nov 2019 : 18:23:54
I define alignment in two axes - law-chaos and good-evil.
Law-chaos is about structure of beings mind - if it keeps its descisions based on rules (any) or impulsively on the spot.
Good-evil is about selfishness - more you care about others gooder you are.
There are many ways those can combine and defining a full character as one of the combination might be hard and for that reason mortals do not have a fix alignment so that it changes through life. Planar beings on the other hand have alignment fixed and cannot behave differently even if they want to.

Demons are selfish irracional creatures that revel in destruction but it is not the destruction that makes them evil. Common drow is evil but he need not be cruel or deceiving.

One thing to remember is that there are commonly available spells that can tell you somebody's alignment so this is a in-game attribute.
Kentinal Posted - 03 Nov 2019 : 18:03:48
In part Evil is based on actions. A monster that causes only destruction and has no respect for the rights of others do tend to be classified as Evil. As far as it goes the umber hulk is considered intelligent.
As far as a character or NPC goes, they do not know the alignment they are. That is something that is determined by what they do. A player can say their Paladin is LG, however if he goes and kills all he dislikes because they do not agree with him (or they might do Evil in the future) the Paladin is actually not LG.

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