| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Crystyn
Seeker
58 Posts |
 Posted - 21 Apr 2014 : 01:43:38
|
Spellplague is over, Abeir and Tori, are seperating, the weave is back, Mystra is coming back.
Now Deinier wrote himself into the weave so he should either be able to make a return or Mystra might not look favourably upon his presence within the weave.
Cadderlies fate is just too cruel, having to walk the circle for all eternity at least release him from that fate. Though w/o Deinier he'd be one of the fateless and end up at Kelemvors court so that'd be suboptimal.
|
Finally completed my Drizzt collection |
|
|
hashimashadoo
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1150 Posts |
Posted - 21 Apr 2014 : 17:11:30
|
I guess since he's Salvatore's character, it's up to him. Being brought back to life wouldn't be ideal either since his wife and children are almost certainly dead.
Maybe, since Deneir is part of the Weave, Cadderly could serve Mystra. I see him losing access to the Metatext but receiving sudden inspiration from the Weave itself to make a spell more powerful or to create an awesome magic weapon. Maybe he'd lose his cleric powers and decide to relearn everything, maybe switching to wizardry. |
When life turns it's back on you...sneak attack for extra damage.
Head admin of the FR wiki:
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/ |
 |
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 21 Apr 2014 : 18:38:42
|
I'm not sure how afterlife burocracy goes, but would Cadderly really end up on the wall of the faithless? Shouldn't he go instead to the realm of whatever god picked up Deneir's portfolio? It's also very possible that Deneir comes back with The Sundering considering that other dead powers are making a comeback (Mystra, Mask, Helm for certain, with Vhaeraun a possibility).
Regardless, I hope Cadderly gets released. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
Crystyn
Seeker
58 Posts |
Posted - 21 Apr 2014 : 19:00:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
I'm not sure how afterlife burocracy goes, but would Cadderly really end up on the wall of the faithless? Shouldn't he go instead to the realm of whatever god picked up Deneir's portfolio? It's also very possible that Deneir comes back with The Sundering considering that other dead powers are making a comeback (Mystra, Mask, Helm for certain, with Vhaeraun a possibility).
Regardless, I hope Cadderly gets released.
Oghma probably took over Deinier's portfolio, Deinier kinda was his subdeity. I guess if Cadderly accepted him he would end up in his halls, Cadderly never drew power from Oghma though but only the weave at the end so hard to say.
As towards Vhaeraun, in the Adversary there was a chosen of a Drow god and he was male, Lolth wanted the D, if you know what I mean, and his powers didn't fit Eilistraee so either the masked Eilistraee or Vhaeraun
I'd prefer a new one though. Maybe it's time for a mortal to steal divinity again I vote for Pharaun half-kiddingly. |
Finally completed my Drizzt collection |
Edited by - Crystyn on 21 Apr 2014 19:01:25 |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 21 Apr 2014 : 20:41:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Crystyn
As towards Vhaeraun, in the Adversary there was a chosen of a Drow god and he was male, Lolth wanted the D, if you know what I mean, and his powers didn't fit Eilistraee so either the masked Eilistraee or Vhaeraun
I'd prefer a new one though. Maybe it's time for a mortal to steal divinity again I vote for Pharaun half-kiddingly.
The author said it was Vhaeraun, tho.
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by ErinMEvans
(...)
a.Among the secondary/tertiary characters, there is... Chosen of Vhaeraun...
Hi Erin,
I am a little curious here how there could be a fully-powered Chosen of Vhaeraun, given that Vhaeraun is... well, dead.
Unless this is an indication that V and his sister are back. When Mystra was dead, Elminster and the remaining seven sisters had their Chosen powers seriously fubarred. So is this a little hint?
Wait, what? Vhaeraun is dead? Oh holy crap, why didn't anyone tell me?
(Sorry. That was funny in my head.)
Good catch! This is what I would call one of the hints as to what is happening in the larger story. As I believe has been said elsewhere, the gods are all coming back, and here is some proof of that (among others...). And I was quick and snatched Vhaeraun.
|
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
|
|
|
Crystyn
Seeker
58 Posts |
Posted - 21 Apr 2014 : 21:05:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Good catch! This is what I would call one of the hints as to what is happening in the larger story. As I believe has been said elsewhere, the gods are all coming back, and here is some proof of that (among others...). And I was quick and snatched Vhaeraun.
[/quote]
Unbeknownst to those that don't read every FR book as well as anything about the lore, myself included, many gods have made their comeback, heck even Bane made his return (I like the old bastard way more than Cyric anyway).
Speaking of Cyric did Mask finally get back the domain of intrigue?
Torm was even made a greater deity.
Mystras(Midnight) death was kind of anti climatic there still are only a few lines found in a select few novels. |
Finally completed my Drizzt collection |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 22 Apr 2014 : 03:18:37
|
| I don't think Cadderly would end up on the Wall, either. Oghma would be the one most likely to take him in if Deneir was still dead. I hated how he died, and I too think he should be released. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Thauranil
Master of Realmslore
India
1591 Posts |
Posted - 22 Apr 2014 : 11:53:22
|
| I wouldn't mind seeing Deneir back. His death seemed a bit abrupt to me. Cadderly however would not fit into the current realms that well so perhaps he should move on the afterlife. |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 22 Apr 2014 : 19:18:17
|
I didn't like how Cadderly ended in "The Cleric Quintet". The whole self-sacrifice in order to earn a god's blessing, as well as the idea of the god accepting that sacrifice, just irked me. It reminds me of Bruno Mars's song "Grenade", in which a dude crazily procaims his willingness to hurt or kill himself in a 1000 different ways to win a girl's love. That he would be so willing just irks me as stupidly self-deprecating/self-defeating/masochistic, and that any girl or god would accept such sacrifice on her/its behalf is cruelly sadistic. I kept wanting Deneir to call "Quits" to the whole process, halt the sacrifice bit, but noo...he had to go and accept it, which gave the appearance of validating and legitimizing it. Ugh!
After that, I didn't much care what else happened to ol' Cad. Good riddance. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 22 Apr 2014 : 19:37:31
|
| But then he became young again. I think it was a test. Deneir wanted to see if Cadderly was willing to go the distance, so to speak. He started out as a doubtful follower, after all. I don't like how he died. I think it was anticlimatic and rushed. Even if he isn't resurrected, I think he should get his just reward in the afterlife. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2014 : 02:20:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
But then he became young again.
But he didn't know that at the time, though. So that has no bearing on his choice, at the time.
And that choice irks me.
quote:
I think it was a test. Deneir wanted to see if Cadderly was willing to go the distance, so to speak. He started out as a doubtful follower, after all.
I don't like such tests. They seem designed to hurt the subject for no good reason.
The Biblical story of the god Yahweh ordering Abraham to sacrifice his son comes to mind. I don't care that an angel intervened and halted the killing at the last moment--that anyone would ever countenance such an act just irks me. It seems like an illness on the part of the god, and on the part of the believer.
If a woman emotionally tortures her lover in order to see how much he'll endure to keep her in his life, that's sick and cruel.
If a physical torturer holds a person's head under water, or burns him with cigarette butts, or breaks one finger at a time, in order to see if the subject can go the distance, that's cruel infliction of pain and suffering.
Call it a "test" if you want.
But it doesn't make it right.
Shouldn't a god be able to read his believer's mind anyway? What need is there to actually go through all that pain and suffering? If a god could magically grant a believer's wish without inflicting a bunch of concomitant suffering, then shouldn't the god do so? (I am thinking of the human concept of medical duty of care, here.)
quote:
I don't like how he died. I think it was anticlimatic and rushed. Even if he isn't resurrected, I think he should get his just reward in the afterlife.
I agree that something seemed a little off about how it unfolded. Maybe "rushed" is the best way to describe it.
But I actually respect Cadderly's sacrifice in order to save his friends and family a lot more than I do his sacrifice to rebuild the library-cathedral and to honor his god.
And they actually tried to stop him, because of their compassion for him--unlike his god. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2014 : 03:17:59
|
Some of the gods demand such things of their devout, some do not, I've noticed. That Biblical story actually came to mind for me, as well. However, Cadderly was asked to sacrifice no one but himself, and, very true, he did not know he would be made young again, and that's why I say it was a test. It's the willingness to sacrifice yourself for something. It seems cruel to us (and truth be told that Abraham story never sat well with me, either. I think a lot of Biblical scholars even today are still trying to make sense of it), but we are only mortal, and cannot understand the ways of the gods. The Spirit Soaring was meant as more than just a tribute to Deneir. It was a place of knowledge. Deneir didn't want it built just for him.
Technically, yes, a god should be able to read his follower's mind, but a lot of them don't, and even if they did, again, Cadderly started out as a rather doubtful follower. I think Deneir's death actually contributed to Cadderly's, because of his connection with his god. If Deneir hadn't died, than Cadderly's fate might have been different, though I can't be sure. But his death just felt...meh, to me. I know, such a descriptive word lol XD |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2014 : 03:38:41
|
| I'm actually curious what the Sundering will mean for Cadderly if anything. |
|
|
|
jerrod
Learned Scribe
157 Posts |
Posted - 30 Apr 2014 : 00:04:37
|
| Perhaps though denier already knew what cadderly was willing to sacrifice,the lesson was so cadderly himself would learn the deepts his own devotion to the principles of denier and thus gain the wisdom needed to be the chosen of denier,also it set a example for the rest of the faithful and thus reaffirmed their faith as well....#128532; |
I haven't been here in years but I used to be DARKFLAME MILLITHOR(DROW ARCHMAGE of wildmagic |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 30 Apr 2014 : 19:15:19
|
About the real life biblical stories:
- In the old testament, god was basically a jerk.
- In the new testament, he became a nice guy.
I imagine that the differences stem from the time periods in which these stories were written. The change between the New and Old testaments was probably a way to set Christianity apart from Judaism. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3736 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 02:03:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by jerrod
Perhaps though denier already knew what cadderly was willing to sacrifice,the lesson was so cadderly himself would learn the deepts his own devotion to the principles of denier and thus gain the wisdom needed to be the chosen of denier...
-I like this explanation. |
(A Tri-Partite Arcanist Who Has Forgotten More Than Most Will Ever Know)
Elves of Faerûn
Vol I- The Elves of Faerûn
Vol. III- Spells of the Elves
Vol. VI- Mechanical Compendium |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 05:37:24
|
It sounds like someone trying to rationalize/glorify sadistic torture, to me.
Suffering happens in life. It sucks, but it does. And when it does, we try to find some silver lining, some good that came of it, in order to try to make sense of it, and in order to avoid embracing a nihilistic, completely defeatist attitude. In so doing, we may take up a mindset in which we find some value to torturous ordeals, because at least something positive also occurred during--and perhaps because of--that ordeal.
But that doesn't justify the torture/suffering.
It only finds some beneficial outcome that happened to accompany the suffering.
I think we err when we go beyond that and begin to embrace the suffering, itself (like so many followers of Ilmater).
And I think a god would err if it caused, or allowed to go unchecked, suffering/torture upon one of its believers. A loving god should protect its loved ones from such.
A person should be able to learn devotion and wisdom without having to be exposed to pain and suffering for the trouble. That's just a sick, mean-spirited system, IMO.
If life were only brought about by unintelligent, uncaring, inanimate forces and energies (an atheistic universe), then there would really be no one to blame for most of the suffering that occurs.
But in a theistic universe view, there most certainly is. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 12:20:12
|
The problem with that kind of logic BEAST, is that if deities were always there to prevent the suffering of their followers could you really say that their followers would be free? They'd just be living inside a bubble constructed by their deity. It'd be a pretty comfortable prison, that's for sure, but it would still be a prison all the same.
Freedom isn't just the good, it comes with the bad as well. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 13:53:19
|
| Why so? A good deity could protect their people from suffering, but if someone wanted to choose and try a different way, (s)he would still be free to do so (the god may try to warn or dissuade him/her, but at the end won't force such a thing on one of his/her/its followers). Parents generally try to shield their offspring from bad experiences, however this doesn't prevent them from choosing otherwise. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 14:26:47
|
| Agreed, but BEAST was saying that their god should stop them from doing stuff that would cause them suffering. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
Edited by - Tanthalas on 01 May 2014 17:58:25 |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 17:23:22
|
| There is a difference between followers suffering because, as BEAST pointed out, life sucks sometimes, and the gods -making- that person suffer, such as Caddderly's sacrifice. However, this is not to say that Deneir is a sadistic, evil god. To outsiders (us) it may seem cruel and unjust, but to someone like Cadderly, it is seen as a necessary sacrifice. And Deneir rewarded him later on. Cadderly didn't know this would happen, and that's the point. Doing something for someone without the knowledge of reward. Ilmater actually doesn't relish in suffering either. He wants to prevent suffering. That's why a lot of his priests are healers. The whole priests being masochists is actually not of his dogma. I think that is something the priests decided to do for themselves, as a way to show their faith, but it's not like Ilmater dictated it. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 17:59:40
|
| Deneir didn't make Cadderly suffer though, it was his choice to rebuild the library. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 18:19:48
|
True. Sorry, it's been years since I read those books.
I was going to add that whatever our real world views, the gods are an active force in the Realms (5e is seeking to lessen that a bit, though they'll still be there). They are a part of people's lives, but not -every- part. And some are more actively involved than others. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Crystyn
Seeker
58 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2014 : 14:10:00
|
| I completely forgot to ask what became of Ivan and Pikel, the Bouldershoulder brothers. Don't particularly care whether Cadderly's lineage continued. |
Finally completed my Drizzt collection |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 25 May 2014 : 04:39:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
Deneir didn't make Cadderly suffer though, it was his choice to rebuild the library.
Cadderly didn't choose to suffer. He chose to wish for Deneir's power in raising the library. But he suffered as a result of the wish spell(s) being granted.
And his god apparently did nothing to spare him from that suffering. He stood by and let Cadderly do it--like a parent allowing his child to put his hand in a fire, or a fork in an electrical socket.
That's some loving god.
Or, at least, it's some sort of cruelly limited god-system that the Realms has, if its gods are not even allowed to spare their most fervent followers from that.
Remember, "The Cleric Quintet" ended with Cadderly's woeful sacrifice, and gave no inkling that his suffering would be reversed years later. So my intense dislike for all of this is based on that climactic conclusion to the tale. His suffering was posited as being very final, at that time.
I don't really care for Cadderly's choice. I'm more concerned with Deneir's choice not to prevent the suffering. "With great power comes great responsibility," and all that jazz. Deneir should've intervened in the suffering.
I just don't see nobility in all the suffering. We humans try to rationalize it, after the fact, in order to make ourselves feel better about it. But we--and the gods, if they exist--have a duty to try to minimize it whenever we possibly can. That we might be able to pull out some sort of silver lining retroactively does not actually make that suffering a good or noble thing, though. It only shows how good we are at rationalizing things. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 25 May 2014 : 04:57:04
|
| In the Realms, the gods do exist. They are part of the world. As for the suffering...I don't fully understand it, and maybe we're not supposed to. I think it comes back to balance. There has to be evil in order for there to be good, and there has to be suffering to balance prosperity. That's my theory, anyway |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 25 May 2014 : 10:14:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
In the Realms, the gods do exist. They are part of the world. As for the suffering...I don't fully understand it, and maybe we're not supposed to. I think it comes back to balance. There has to be evil in order for there to be good, and there has to be suffering to balance prosperity. That's my theory, anyway
Nature already does this on its own with death, there's no need for gods to add upon it, even more so if they are supposed to be loving/caring/nurturing/w/e... |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 25 May 2014 10:19:13 |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 25 May 2014 : 12:00:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
Cadderly didn't choose to suffer. He chose to wish for Deneir's power in raising the library. But he suffered as a result of the wish spell(s) being granted.
And his god apparently did nothing to spare him from that suffering. He stood by and let Cadderly do it--like a parent allowing his child to put his hand in a fire, or a fork in an electrical socket.
That's some loving god.
Or, at least, it's some sort of cruelly limited god-system that the Realms has, if its gods are not even allowed to spare their most fervent followers from that.
Remember, "The Cleric Quintet" ended with Cadderly's woeful sacrifice, and gave no inkling that his suffering would be reversed years later. So my intense dislike for all of this is based on that climactic conclusion to the tale. His suffering was posited as being very final, at that time.
I don't really care for Cadderly's choice. I'm more concerned with Deneir's choice not to prevent the suffering. "With great power comes great responsibility," and all that jazz. Deneir should've intervened in the suffering.
I just don't see nobility in all the suffering. We humans try to rationalize it, after the fact, in order to make ourselves feel better about it. But we--and the gods, if they exist--have a duty to try to minimize it whenever we possibly can. That we might be able to pull out some sort of silver lining retroactively does not actually make that suffering a good or noble thing, though. It only shows how good we are at rationalizing things.
Like I mentioned before, Deneir (and all the other goodly gods) can't just keep his followers inside a bubble to prevent their suffering. Rebuilding the library was Cadderly's choice and it came with consequences. Because if wielding power like that had no consequences, then we'd be seeing similar stuff on a daily basis in the Realms. Cadderly also wasn't a child that needed to be protected from his choices, he understood the consequences of his actions and decided to pursue them anyway.
The gods don't have a duty to minimize suffering. Look at all the catastrophic events that happen in the Realms. How often do you see the gods swooping down to fix everything? It took over 100 years for Ao to decide to implement the Sundering (and he kind of exists outside the system in that he doesn't require followers). What the gods do is provide a moral compass that their followers can adhere to and in exchange for their faith the deity returns some limited support.
Sure, in a perfect world, everyone would be holding hands and skipping across flower fields, but the Realms aren't perfect. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 25 May 2014 : 13:52:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
Like I mentioned before, Deneir (and all the other goodly gods) can't just keep his followers inside a bubble to prevent their suffering.
[...]The gods don't have a duty to minimize suffering[...]
Not specifically talking about Cadderly here, but to protect and try to prevent suffering is different than denying choice, and is something that a good deity would do not because it is his/her/its duty, but because unnecessary suffering that could otherwise be avoided usually isn't something good beings tend to like. I've already said it.
quote:
Why so? A good deity could protect their people from suffering, but if someone wanted to choose and try a different way, (s)he would still be free to do so (the god may try to warn or dissuade him/her, but at the end won't force such a thing on one of his/her/its followers). Parents generally try to shield their offspring from bad experiences, however this doesn't prevent them from choosing otherwise.
quote:
[...]What the gods do is provide a moral compass that their followers can adhere to and in exchange for their faith the deity returns some limited support.[...]
Meh, for some deities it could mean sharing a goal and an idea and working together towards it. And for some gods those goals are aimed to improve people's life.
quote:
Look at all the catastrophic events that happen in the Realms. How often do you see the gods swooping down to fix everything? It took over 100 years for Ao to decide to implement the Sundering (and he kind of exists outside the system in that he doesn't require followers).
Sure, in a perfect world, everyone would be holding hands and skipping across flower fields, but the Realms aren't perfect.
If we stick to their portayal in novels, realmsian gods just do their thing all the time w/o giving a crap about who suffers and dies for it. The Sundering is the epithome of this, actually. It has Ao letting all the cataclysms and destruction go through just so that he could teach the gods a lesson about good behaviour. Seriously? But then many of the times gods have been involved in big events, they were simply part of a Deus Ex Machina to implement drastic changes in the setting, no matter how little sense the actions of the involved deities could make. If we were to take the idea at the base of the Sundering/Spellplague(Insert divine RSE here) seriously, realmsian gods -including Ao- would be a joke, they would basically be 5 years olds with nukes, caring very little about the consequences of their doing.
I personally don't want something akin to how greek gods are depicted in mithology in the Realms. IMO good deities should at least try to prevent suffering and no, this would not make the world 'flowers and rainbows', it would just make it better and give those entities a purpose in the story.
What would then be the point of non cleric mortals even considering gods, how could they be inspiring beacons for their followers? |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 25 May 2014 14:04:40 |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 25 May 2014 : 14:11:43
|
But deities do try to intervene in the Realms using their followers as a proxy. They just don't swoop down on the Realms to intervene directly (or rarely do).
There are several points for non cleric mortals to consider gods:
- To gain the favor/blessing of their god (gods don't only use clerics as a proxy in the Realms).
- To go to their god's realm when they die instead of being left in the Fugue plain.
- To avoid being tossed into the Wall of the Faithless.
The Fugue plain and especially the Wall of the Faithless are the Realms biggest motivators for people to stick with a god. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 25 May 2014 : 15:32:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
But deities do try to intervene in the Realms using their followers as a proxy. They just don't swoop down on the Realms to intervene directly (or rarely do).
They don't swoop down and solve everything (even if they actually do meddle, often ending up exploding stuff around them), but if they try to intervene through their agents, then it means that good deities actually do act to prevent suffering...
And in some cases, if a word/message/signal -or simple actions- could avoid unnecessary deaths/agony/pain/failures (while still ultimately leaving choice open, ofc), then I guess a good god would not hesitate to do that.
quote:
There are several points for non cleric mortals to consider gods:
- To gain the favor/blessing of their god (gods don't only use clerics as a proxy in the Realms).
- To go to their god's realm when they die instead of being left in the Fugue plain.
- To avoid being tossed into the Wall of the Faithless.
The Fugue plain and especially the Wall of the Faithless are the Realms biggest motivators for people to stick with a god.
I meant stuff that is interesting from a story telling PoV (as I said, stuff that gives good deities a purpose in the story besides just standing there and doing their thing). Fear of the Wall of the Faithless is just not that interesting (and is yet another gimmick that is still kept in place by Kelemvor beacuse of very vague reasons), and -to me- adhering to a cause because of what you can achieve in life is far more compelling and relatable than merely doing so for your afterlife or in order to get favors.
If people see that a deity actually cares for her/his/its followers and has a goal that makes them say 'hey this makes sense, it could improve our life', many will be inspired to fight/work for that cause, leading to various plot-hooks. A good god which doesn't even try to prevent suffering or to actually stand for ideals that can better the world (and I'm not necessarily talking about big stuff here, even spreading joy/love... is something) can only have convenience-based interactions with mortals (what you pointed out, which basically is lipservice), and that strikes me as bland/boring (sure, such cases can exist, but they should happen because of choice on the mortal part, not because of the deity's behaviour discouraging deeper kind of relations). |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 25 May 2014 16:03:42 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
So Deinier and Cadderly
