| Author |
 Topic  |
|
bloodtide_the_red
Learned Scribe
USA
297 Posts |
 Posted - 14 Mar 2021 : 05:29:19
|
This is a typical 20th/21st century problem. Before the mid 20th century people had no problem with kid death. The bulk of myths and even more fairy tales feature lots of bloody death. They were made to scare children
The whole Disney lead of "kids are special and safe and just have fun adventure romps and maybe...maybe, get a little dirt on their cheek...awww" does not come around until the mid 20th century.
So kids as another brick in the wall works out just fine.
But, at the same time...well, it has not point. You can scare a pre teen kid sure, but having them understand faith is problimatic. Even more so as you go younger. Younger kids simply won't understand.
So young kids might as well just go to whatever god they most closely followed...even vaguely.
Of course this opens the can of worms of kid afterlife.........does Billy stay five years old as a dead kid? Does he ever grow up? Is Billy stuck at five years old for ever? |
 |
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 14 Mar 2021 : 05:35:48
|
| I don't give two bits about a fictional kid in a fantasy realm...I don't like it because it makes no sense on its face value (the wall). |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 14 Mar 2021 : 05:42:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
If I had to make a ruling on it, myself, I'd say that children who die too young to worship would be reincarnated -- send the soul back so it can make a choice.
-Personally, that makes the most sense. I know R.A. Salvatore reincarnated his main characters, but what other examples are there in-setting. I'm drawing a blank. Resurrected, yes, but reincarnated as someone/something else, not so much.
There was one in the Netheril trilogy... Though I'd hesitate to hold that particular trilogy up as a fine example of Realmlore. In fact, that reincarnation was something I held against that series, until a recent Tweet from Ed:
quote:
Feb 1, 2020
@MisrulesTheDay
Good Master Ed! Other than the eponymous spell, what are the circumstances under which a soul might reincarnate in the Realms? Is that something that happens?
@TheEdVerse
It is, though not often. Sometimes it occurs due to a curse or magic item ability or ‘hanging’ (cast in a spot, waiting for a future passersby to affect) spell operating on a dead being.
More often, however, it’s because a deity wants that soul to live on to complete a task or attempt something. Not that they’ll necessarily communicate that desire directly to the reincarnated being, who may blunder along.
#Realmslore
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 14 Mar 2021 : 05:43:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alexander Clark
quote:
Personally, that makes the most sense. I know R.A. Salvatore reincarnated his main characters, but what other examples are there in-setting. I'm drawing a blank. Resurrected, yes, but reincarnated as someone/something else, not so much.
Most elves get reincarnated if we were to apply 5e cosmology to the Realms (which is debatable I think?) From Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes:
"Each birth represents an elf soul that has been to Arvandor and returned. Mortal elves cannot know if it is the soul of someone recently dead or someone who died millennia ago. They cannot even be certain it is an elf of the same world."
According to Ed:
quote:
@Kendradream
in a previous tweet, you mentioned reincarnation was rare. What about elves? I know they have believed in reincarnation, but I always thought Arvandor was a final reward where elven spirits dwell. MToF paints it as a "waystation" for elven souls.
@TheEdVerse
Reincarnation for elves can happen, but is exceedingly rare. It’s usually seen as a penance for rights that must be wronged (in the new life), or “I can’t be happy in Arvandor until this unfinished business is dealt with,” and said unfinished business often involves avenging family or mate or close friends.
#Realmslore
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 14 Mar 2021 : 05:45:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden
I don't give two bits about a fictional kid in a fantasy realm...I don't like it because it makes no sense on its face value (the wall).
The Wall is certainly one of those things that detracts more from the setting than it adds.
I've previously theorized that the slow dissolution of souls in the Wall might be feeding energy to something else -- but there's nothing at all to support that idea; it was just some speculation. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7968 Posts |
Posted - 14 Mar 2021 : 06:08:08
|
Souls do not have eternal afterlives in D&D. Some are rewarded with paradise, others are punished with torment ... either way, they eventually merge or dissolve into the stuff of their plane.
Why should it be any different for "faithless" souls who have no particular affinity towards a deity, alignment, or plane?
They gradually dissolve into oblivion - they cease to exist as individuals - maybe they're somehow recycled or reformatted or reincarnated - but variations of the same ultimate fate happen to every other soul. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 14 Mar 2021 : 16:20:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Souls do not have eternal afterlives in D&D. Some are rewarded with paradise, others are punished with torment ... either way, they eventually merge or dissolve into the stuff of their plane.
Why should it be any different for "faithless" souls who have no particular affinity towards a deity, alignment, or plane?
They gradually dissolve into oblivion - they cease to exist as individuals - maybe they're somehow recycled or reformatted or reincarnated - but variations of the same ultimate fate happen to every other soul.
Except for the ones that get promoted to other forms. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7968 Posts |
Posted - 14 Mar 2021 : 18:55:51
|
quote:
Except for the ones that get promoted to other forms.
True.
Although those who "ascend" into divine ranks lose some of their self-identity, they're sustained (and shaped) by the belief of their followers. Those who become more angelic/celestial usually must relinquish their yucky dirty human fleshy attachments (essentially sacrifice part of their soul) to move towards their spiritual form. Those who become more fiendish usually have their humanity burnt and torn away by cruelties and sufferings beyond endurance. In all these "promotions" the soul is arguably no longer the same individual, the transition to immortality removes parts of the soul while infusing other things into it.
To me it seems no different than oblivion in the Wall. Every soul will die after enough time ... it almost seems "merciful" to accelerate the process to mere centuries/millennia for those souls who refuse to accept any other fate. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 14 Mar 2021 18:58:09 |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3736 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2021 : 01:36:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by bloodtide_the_red
This is a typical 20th/21st century problem. Before the mid 20th century people had no problem with kid death. The bulk of myths and even more fairy tales feature lots of bloody death. They were made to scare children
The whole Disney lead of "kids are special and safe and just have fun adventure romps and maybe...maybe, get a little dirt on their cheek...awww" does not come around until the mid 20th century.
So kids as another brick in the wall works out just fine.
But, at the same time...well, it has not point. You can scare a pre teen kid sure, but having them understand faith is problimatic. Even more so as you go younger. Younger kids simply won't understand.
So young kids might as well just go to whatever god they most closely followed...even vaguely.
Of course this opens the can of worms of kid afterlife.........does Billy stay five years old as a dead kid? Does he ever grow up? Is Billy stuck at five years old for ever?
-It has really nothing to do with "fairness", it has to do with a simple need to understand, as this seems one of those things where no information we have gives a clear and decisive answer. A newborn baby who does a few minutes after birth, he/she does not have a god that they most closely followed, even vaguely. They don't qualify as theists, faithless, or false. Something happens to them, but it just isn't clear. |
(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 |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1477 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2021 : 02:23:58
|
The Wall makes sense if you consider it part of Myrkul's duties as Lord of the Dead. That's no so different from Nerull using souls as part of the architecture in Carceri, or Hel's poisonous halls in Niflheim. The other powers can't really do anything because Myrkul was well within his rights to render judgement upon the souls of the dead as he saw fit, as part of his divine job.
Death gods from other pantheons would just note that Myrkul did his job and kept his realm tidy, what more was needed as a death god?
In a setting where divine intervention is immutable fact, being false or faithless strikes me as a really stupid thing to be. It's going out of your way to antagonize the divine. |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2021 : 00:34:39
|
I think many people have a hard time swallowing the "fact" that mortals must kiss the arse of some divine being or else face a horrible fate...even though it is a fantasy/fiction realm, it is hard for some to accept that those who don't bend the knee to some otherworldly being get snuffed/tortured essentially.
It smacks of real world religious punishment and that could have been left out of the Realms. |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7968 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2021 : 01:34:56
|
quote:
It smacks of real world religious punishment and that could have been left out of the Realms.
A lot of real world concepts could (and should) be left out of the Realms.
But religion (or lack of religion) is always a sensitive topic which produces stubborn opinions and arguments from all sides - from those who accept faith and from those who reject faith. I'm actually surprised this scroll hasn't degenerated into the usual padlocked pile of confrontational ranting hostilities.
But I'm actually even more surprised that WotC would publish material which could ignite passionate controversies over such a sensitive topic. Especially after all the negative attentions D&D received in past decades from "conservative" religious groups.
I would've expect more common sense (and business sense) from the designers/authors. Or at least some options, some conditional qualifiers, some exceptions which could provide alternatives for those unhappy with the mainstream treatment. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2021 : 01:48:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I would've expect more common sense (and business sense) from the designers/authors. Or at least some options, some conditional qualifiers, some exceptions which could provide alternatives for those unhappy with the mainstream treatment.
I think it's like Mystra 2.0 being Good-aligned in one novel: it was meant to be a plot point visited one time and disregarded after, but people seized on it and just wouldn't let go. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Kylia Quilor
Acolyte
USA
17 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2021 : 02:11:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden
I think many people have a hard time swallowing the "fact" that mortals must kiss the arse of some divine being or else face a horrible fate...even though it is a fantasy/fiction realm, it is hard for some to accept that those who don't bend the knee to some otherworldly being get snuffed/tortured essentially.
It smacks of real world religious punishment and that could have been left out of the Realms.
Well, given the nature of the realms, I'm not sure praying to the various gods of the pantheon is kissing ass or bending the knee per se. As is alluded to many times in the Faerun rulebooks and the fiction books, most people are a bit more actively polytheistic in their approach.
Being full on Faithless does take some actual work in the Realms. |
Halisstra Melarn Deserved Better |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2021 : 02:53:53
|
| True, but what if someone chose to never pray to any deity? I'm not talking about some "f*** the gods, I'll work to make people stop worshipping gods, oppose the work of churces, etc..." kind of person, just someone who doesn't pray. I mean, from a design standpoint, why have that person be condemned to agony or whatever? |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1477 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2021 : 04:40:50
|
Prior to the Time of Troubles, where gods were not dependent on worshipers for power, the Wall could have been explained as Myrkul being a dick while staying within the boundaries of his job.
Post-ToT, AO made the genius decision of tying a god's strength to his worshipers so now the Wall exists to make the entire pantheon out to be cruel asshats. |
|
|
|
Demzer
Senior Scribe
873 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2021 : 09:14:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden
I think many people have a hard time swallowing the "fact" that mortals must kiss the arse of some divine being or else face a horrible fate...
"Many" people should keep their own belief, or rather non-belief, out of the game and understand what the pantheistic religion of the Realms is before complaining about things they don't understand.
There have been countless threads on this subject, in all of those it was pointed out that Franomir the Farmer doesn't have to do jack s**t beside caring for his land and farm and animals until he dies and then he'll keep caring for a farmstead in Chauntea's realm. No "arse kissing", no threat of "horrible fate", he does something (literally anything, since there are also gods of bloody murder and gods of carnage and gods of arson and what have you) and he ends up somewhere in the Planes where he keeps doing whatever made him happy "forever". But there is always someone here trying to nitpick because they cannot take off their own personal biases so if they see the words "religion" or "god" they throw an issy fit. |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11690 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2021 : 13:13:51
|
| I still say the easiest answer for the original post is just Lurue brings the kids to the land of tootsie roll pops where they meet Mr. Owl and find out the great mystery of how many licks does it take to get to its center before being reborn as a talking ferret.... or a Kercpa!.... or a tiny "muisling" mousefolk of Katashaka. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Kylia Quilor
Acolyte
USA
17 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2021 : 13:53:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
True, but what if someone chose to never pray to any deity? I'm not talking about some "f*** the gods, I'll work to make people stop worshipping gods, oppose the work of churces, etc..." kind of person, just someone who doesn't pray. I mean, from a design standpoint, why have that person be condemned to agony or whatever?
That implies that prayer is the only means of worshipping or honoring a god. Maybe I missed something somewhere, but my understanding of the wall of the Faithless was that it required people who were actively disbelieving in some capacity. You know, like High Nethril's schtick that the gods were all just powerful wizards who got the cheat codes of reality or the Imaskar Empire's active hatred of the gods/divine magic.
I mean, don't get me wrong, I think it's a bit strange Wizards isn't removing or altering it, but it's part of the unique flavor of FR - other D&D/Related settings often take a fairly lackadaisical approach to deities, all too often letting clerics get power without even following one (something that I dislike in general, though some settings make it work better than others), so Faerun having the wall of the Faithless makes disbelief a conscious choice, rather than a lazy one. |
Halisstra Melarn Deserved Better |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2021 : 16:26:55
|
What if that hypotethical person who has nothing against the gods acknowledges that the gods are a force, but just doesn't want to engage in worship? From a designer viewpoint, why should they be condemned to agony? Now, as Demzer staid, my understanding was that a person like that wouldn't be condemned to the Wall, but the matter is far from clear, because other sources have underserving people condemned to the Wall. Ironically, the goddess in our profile pictures has multiple instances of her being fine with people choosing to not worship her if that wasn't the path that they wanted to follow, so she'd probably be fine with this person too.
FR has always had a significant divine involvement without even needing to mention the Wall, though. The Wall only made sense as Myrkul's dickish-ness, as Lord of Bones said, because it was portrayed as an unfair thing to readers, some horrible thing that came into existence because of Myrkul's sadism. The problem here is that cases like the person that I mentioned above being condemned to the Wall are portrayed as a fair thing with the current iteration of the Wall, because official sources do absolutely nothing to tell you that the Wall isn't for people who just acknowledge the gods but don't engage in any form of worship. You have to get to places like Candlekeep to find that out, and that's bad, because very few people will do that. That said, WotC has errata'd it out of the SCAG, so 5e currently doesn't have any canon mention of it.
On a side note, to be fair to the Netherese, FR gods are indeed portrayed like super powerful wizards. FR fiction is *really* bad at making deities feel like deities, rather than a bunch of 5 yo's with nukes. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 17 Mar 2021 16:36:59 |
|
|
|
Kylia Quilor
Acolyte
USA
17 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2021 : 17:15:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
What if that hypotethical person who has nothing against the gods acknowledges that the gods are a force, but just doesn't want to engage in worship? From a designer viewpoint, why should they be condemned to agony? Now, as Demzer staid, my understanding was that a person like that wouldn't be condemned to the Wall, but the matter is far from clear, because other sources have underserving people condemned to the Wall. Ironically, the goddess in our profile pictures has multiple instances of her being fine with people choosing to not worship her if that wasn't the path that they wanted to follow, so she'd probably be fine with this person too.
FR has always had a significant divine involvement without even needing to mention the Wall, though. The Wall only made sense as Myrkul's dickish-ness, as Lord of Bones said, because it was portrayed as an unfair thing to readers, some horrible thing that came into existence because of Myrkul's sadism. The problem here is that cases like the person that I mentioned above being condemned to the Wall are portrayed as a fair thing with the current iteration of the Wall, because official sources do absolutely nothing to tell you that the Wall isn't for people who just acknowledge the gods but don't engage in any form of worship. You have to get to places like Candlekeep to find that out, and that's bad, because very few people will do that. That said, WotC has errata'd it out of the SCAG, so 5e currently doesn't have any canon mention of it.
On a side note, to be fair to the Netherese, FR gods are indeed portrayed like super powerful wizards. FR fiction is *really* bad at making deities feel like deities, rather than a bunch of 5 yo's with nukes.
I mean, in a sense, but I would say that calling a god - especially one of the older ones, like Shar or Selune or the like - merely a 'super powerful wizard' is like calling Warhammer 40k's God-Emperor 'a dead dude on a chair'. It's kind of a massive understatement.
As Karsus learned to his cost, after all.
But I do agree with you that Nethril's views made some sense, given the sheer magical power they had at their disposal - in other settings, a Netherese Archwizard absolutely could get themselves worshipped as a god. |
Halisstra Melarn Deserved Better |
|
|
|
Demzer
Senior Scribe
873 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2021 : 22:24:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
What if that hypotethical person who has nothing against the gods acknowledges that the gods are a force, but just doesn't want to engage in worship? From a designer viewpoint, why should they be condemned to agony? Now, as Demzer staid, my understanding was that a person like that wouldn't be condemned to the Wall, but the matter is far from clear, because other sources have underserving people condemned to the Wall. Ironically, the goddess in our profile pictures has multiple instances of her being fine with people choosing to not worship her if that wasn't the path that they wanted to follow, so she'd probably be fine with this person too.
FR has always had a significant divine involvement without even needing to mention the Wall, though. The Wall only made sense as Myrkul's dickish-ness, as Lord of Bones said, because it was portrayed as an unfair thing to readers, some horrible thing that came into existence because of Myrkul's sadism. The problem here is that cases like the person that I mentioned above being condemned to the Wall are portrayed as a fair thing with the current iteration of the Wall, because official sources do absolutely nothing to tell you that the Wall isn't for people who just acknowledge the gods but don't engage in any form of worship. You have to get to places like Candlekeep to find that out, and that's bad, because very few people will do that. That said, WotC has errata'd it out of the SCAG, so 5e currently doesn't have any canon mention of it.
On a side note, to be fair to the Netherese, FR gods are indeed portrayed like super powerful wizards. FR fiction is *really* bad at making deities feel like deities, rather than a bunch of 5 yo's with nukes.
You don't need Candlekeep to find that out, Ed Greenwood presents Elminster's Forgotten Realms should be good enough as a source for those that want more than a couple sentences in the varios editions campaign settings and "god books".
I'll just cite the passages most relevant to this slightly off-topic discussion we are having, bolding the parts that I think is at the base for my previous post in this scroll (full passage starting at page 132 in section 5, "Gods and Followers"):
"Almost all beings in Faerun worship many gods; as a rule, only zealots and clergy venerate just one deity. [...]
The average Faerunian lives 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. [...]
[...] Otherwise, he ends up in the afterlife serving the deity most appropriate to his moral and ethical outlook. Only those who repudiate the gods (or who as a result oftheir actions are renounced by their gods), despoil altars and frustrate the clerical aims of any deity, or never pray or engage in any form of deliberate worship will qualify as either Faithless or False."
If people actually read the relevant parts of the sourcebooks describing faith in the Realms they would realise how artificial it sounds to imagine someone that doesn't want to engage in the worship of ANY deity in the Realms. It makes sense in our real world, in the Realms not so much.
Still, for those extremely few cases that might happen in the modern Realms, there is another safety net, in the form of the "serve through actions" and "most appropriate to his moral and ethical outlook" clauses.
This means that if, for some paradox that exists only in discussions on these hallowed halls, Franomir the Farmer has never heard of Chauntea or her aliases or analogues, or he did but he decided for mysterious and unknown reasons that he was better off doing his own thing without ever invoking her name, he would still end up on her farmstead, unknowingly and happy ever after, just by tending his fields and his animals.
Regarding the fact the Wall was still up after Myrkul's reign, there have been several explanations but none canonical that I know of. From a merely utilitarian point of view, the City of Judgement might need a supernatural wall to be protected by whatever might want to gorge on souls (from random evil deities, to outsiders of the Lower Planes, night hags, liches, whatever). So the unfortunate Faithless go to power it to protect the worthier (in the eyes of the pantheon) souls within (those awaiting judgement).
I still think the Wall is mostly populated by Netherese and Imaskari souls (which were probably littering the Fugue without being picked up by any divine servants and needed to be put somewhere to prevent them being snatched by any one party), with very infrequent additions.
FR fiction has been mostly terrible on deities, on this I think most of us can agree. |
Edited by - Demzer on 17 Mar 2021 22:25:52 |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2021 : 22:45:35
|
quote:
[...]or never pray or engage in any form of deliberate worship[...]
This easily includes a person who fits the condition that I described, though. And, once again, from a design standpoint, why should such a person be condemned? As I said, sources create a lot of confusion in that regard, especially because you see contradictions everywhere: between one source and the next and even within the same source in this case. Moreover, the only current (5e) source detailing how the Wall works tells you that "you don't worship->you end in the Wall". Correct me if I'm wrong, but earlier editions were quite strict too. People aren't some monkeys who can't even read a simple phrase; the problem (as usual) is that the Realms are sadly full with contradictions.
quote:
From a merely utilitarian point of view, the City of Judgement might need a supernatural wall to be protected by whatever might want to gorge on souls (from random evil deities, to outsiders of the Lower Planes, night hags, liches, whatever)
That would be like building a city wall out of sandwiches, though. Besides, it's not greater deities need souls to shape their realms and create walls and the likes. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 17 Mar 2021 22:49:14 |
|
|
|
Demzer
Senior Scribe
873 Posts |
Posted - 18 Mar 2021 : 08:42:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
That would be like building a city wall out of sandwiches, though.
That's exactly the point, snatch raids (like the tanar'ri ones) stop at the Wall to get a few second-hand expired sandwiches and never get to the City foodstores.
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Besides, it's not greater deities need souls to shape their realms and create walls and the likes.
It's not "a wall" and you know it but arguing this is a minor point.
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
This easily includes a person who fits the condition that I described, though. And, once again, from a design standpoint, why should such a person be condemned? As I said, sources create a lot of confusion in that regard, especially because you see contradictions everywhere: between one source and the next and even within the same source in this case. Moreover, the only current (5e) source detailing how the Wall works tells you that "you don't worship->you end in the Wall". Correct me if I'm wrong, but earlier editions were quite strict too. People aren't some monkeys who can't even read a simple phrase; the problem (as usual) is that the Realms are sadly full with contradictions.
I agree on the presence of some contradictions but I disagree on the fact that from contradictory information people delve without any doubt in only one direction and then clamor that it is the absolute truth and tar the Realms reputation by spreading their own interpretation.
This is still ignoring the fact that the basic premise of all the arguments against the Wall is the completely artificial and made up fact that there is some lunatic that decides to carry on a life on Faerun without ever worshipping any power at all ever. Quite far from what would be considered a fair assumption given the nature of the setting but here we are, discussing it because people cannot let go of their own non-beliefs even when playing a game.
But lets look at the case at hand:
- you got two sentences (the ones I bolded) showing that if you do something that's covered by a Realms deity for the majority of your life (farming, helping others, stabbing people, poisoning people, protecting your own hamlet, spreading lies, stealing, literally whatever) then you are rewarded with an afterlife where you keep doing that;
- then you get one sentence (the one you quoted) that says that without worship you are Faithless;
Even if it's 2 on 1, you decide to assume that the Realms has a pantheon that deliberately condemns people to the Wall out of spite and cruelty.
What's more confusing is that the Wall basically never actively figured in any meaningful way in fiction, sourcebooks, published or organised play adventures (it was only mentioned several times and was the main plot point of one videogame which is not strictly canon [as there aren't reports of major deities disappearing against the devouring power of the player character]), which means there is no conclusive canon prescription to handle it. So it is just an object left for each individual DM to use the way they see fit, or ignore. It's one of those "you decide" moment that plenty of roleplaying settings have. And yet there is always a kneejerk reaction of having to assume it is a pile of s**t and all deities are d***s. Makes me really scared to even consider being in a campaign with any of the fanatics that roam these halls.
You say we are having this discussion because the canon is muddy and confused and I agree. But of all the different interpretations that can be chosen some people always latch on the worst possible one (which causes a lot of paradoxes with the "good" deities too, so creates more problems than it solves). This jumping to the worst assumption possible game is not healthy at all and could be used to completely mess up the setting.
Do we have somewhere in canon that says that King Azoun was totally not a mass murderer of innocent people that bathed in the blood of children with his wife and all his lovers? No, we haven't, because it would be stupid to have to specifiy that, yet I don't see people assuming that that was the case in absence of a canonical objection.
To be less extreme and cartoonish: do we have in canon full denial of the fact that Elminster uses some kind of power to seduce young women for his own selfish reasons? No, we have instead plenty of examples of Elminster bedding whatever hot female passes by and no real explanation of the whys and hows in print in fiction or sourcebooks. You have to chase Ed's replies on this website and in a few other places to see the in-setting explanation (which kinda makes sense but just kinda). This has left us with the situation of people discounting Elminster character as the immature wish fulfillment deus ex machina character of a random writer and the Realms as a lame setting where things like those happen. Is any Realms fan happy with having to debate that that is not the case with non-Realms fans? I don't think so.
In the same way, having to explain repeatedly that worship in the Realms is not the same as worship in the real world is not fun yet it's necessary otherwise the only view point that comes into play is this horrible mess where no good god is really good and other assorted bull excrements.
The spread of this misinformation has already done a lot of damage, the most evident bit of it is that in discussions of the Wall people repeatedly bring up the fact that Kelemvor supposedly removed it and then reinstated it while this thing never happened in canon. And yet it's repeated by everyone, it's even on the wiki, yet it's false.
BTW, I do apologise with the original poster of this scroll but I knew we would end up with this discussion again, that's why my first post here was invoking a meme. And with anyone ready to argue "if you don't want an argument then stop replying in these scrolls" I repeat what I've already said: time permitting I'll always point out the inconsistency of the arguments presented against the Wall of the Faithless because otherwise random people looking for it on the interwebs and finding scrolls like this one would conclude that the false assumptions made by some are the absolute and only truth and that's not the case. |
Edited by - Demzer on 18 Mar 2021 08:46:02 |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3736 Posts |
Posted - 18 Mar 2021 : 20:59:28
|
| -The "you go where your interests/actions/morals/ethics most closely match" raises some interesting questions about how that process works. Chauntea and Lathander would both have legitimate claims on the soul belonging to a farmer in the improbable situation we're theorizing where people are completely ignorant to deities and their churches. Bane and Tempus both could have legitimate claims on the soul of a war criminal-type of general. Wonder what the process of collecting would be like and the conflicts that come up. |
(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 |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4685 Posts |
Posted - 18 Mar 2021 : 21:09:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
-The "you go where your interests/actions/morals/ethics most closely match" raises some interesting questions about how that process works. Chauntea and Lathander would both have legitimate claims on the soul belonging to a farmer in the improbable situation we're theorizing where people are completely ignorant to deities and their churches. Bane and Tempus both could have legitimate claims on the soul of a war criminal-type of general. Wonder what the process of collecting would be like and the conflicts that come up.
When a tie, flip a coin. No magic allowed to effect the coin. |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7968 Posts |
Posted - 18 Mar 2021 : 21:38:04
|
Two or more people might want that item from the store shelf. Any number of customers might have walked by that item before, have picked it up and inspected it closely, have glanced by without even noticing it.
But only the customer who finally takes the item to the checkout will become the new owner.
And the store will eventually need to empty the shelves of unsold (and unsellable) items. Before things spoil. To make room for fresh stock.
Souls might be infinitely precious things to mortals.
But they're just groceries and consumables to the gods. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 18 Mar 2021 21:39:19 |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11690 Posts |
Posted - 18 Mar 2021 : 22:23:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
-The "you go where your interests/actions/morals/ethics most closely match" raises some interesting questions about how that process works. Chauntea and Lathander would both have legitimate claims on the soul belonging to a farmer in the improbable situation we're theorizing where people are completely ignorant to deities and their churches. Bane and Tempus both could have legitimate claims on the soul of a war criminal-type of general. Wonder what the process of collecting would be like and the conflicts that come up.
First come first served was I believe denoted in a novel. I could be wrong. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Azar
Master of Realmslore
1286 Posts |
Posted - 18 Mar 2021 : 22:59:24
|
Actively pushing back against any and all theistic belief seems odd in a setting where priests are literally curing the crippled on a daily basis...not to mentioning resurrecting the dead every other week.
This isn't Planescape we're talking about here  . |
Stand with anybody that stands right. Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong.
Earth names in the Realms are more common than you may think. |
|
|
|
Zeromaru X
Great Reader
Colombia
2442 Posts |
Posted - 18 Mar 2021 : 23:14:23
|
| Well, we do have earthflatters in our real world. I can see some deniers in a world with actual gods just because human nature. |
Instead of seeking change, you prefer a void, merciless abyss of a world... |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Children and the wall.
