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
 Realmslore
 Sages of Realmslore
 Sune's nature - Sentinel spoilers, mature content
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore

USA
1853 Posts

Posted - 24 Apr 2014 :  04:30:38  Show Profile  Visit xaeyruudh's Homepage Send xaeyruudh a Private Message  Reply with Quote  Delete Topic
Please Note
This thread touches on rape, compulsion, lesbians, and suicide. I'm not going to get graphic, but I invite you to proceed with caution.

This issue just arose in Ed's question thread, and Eltheron's full post can be found there. I'd like to move discussion of it here so that it doesn't clutter that thread. Some spoilers should be expected.

I am not Ed, obviously, and I too am looking forward to his answer on the subject. This is just my thoughts, of less relevance but I feel like putting them out here anyway.

Edit: Also, I have not read the novel in question, so I can't respond to specifics except to the extent that you describe them.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

I found this to be extremely disturbing, but not because of the lesbian encounter itself.


Thank you for not having a serious issue around the encounter, or at least not bringing it here. It's good to talk philosophy without muddying the waters with real-world morality, about which there just isn't anything nice to say.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

First and foremost, it strongly suggests that a magically-induced love charm is viewed as actual love by the goddess Sune.


It probably is. I'm not justifying that view; I'm just saying it's logical for Sune to see no problem with magically inducing love in whomever, for whatever purpose she sees fit.

Sune is all love, not just the "awww that's so beautiful" kind.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

Second, there was zero indication that Joelle and Arietta were anything other than friends until Joelle forces the magical charm on Arietta. This seems similar to using rape-drugs, but it's actually worse IMO because it's a rape that is condoned and encouraged by a goddess-granted Chosen power, and the ultimate end-goal is the death (by self-"sacrifice") of the charmed individual.


This gets complicated, imo. Yes, it is like using a rape drug; I think that's a good analogy. As far as being worse... I dunno. It takes the onus of the offense off the mortal's shoulders; she's not raping her friend, or at least not out of a desire to cause harm. She's enacting the will of her goddess. The moral culpability is shifted almost wholly to Sune.

PCs charming people with the intent of making them kill themselves would certainly be considered evil in my campaign. But Sune is not a PC; she's a power, and she operates within a different set of parameters.

I think that powers look at mortals kinda like we look at an ant farm. They're kinda pets, but not in the same sense as a dog or cat; it's not like we have pet names for the ants, or even know exactly how many there are. We watch them sometimes; we ignore them sometimes, and when one dies we throw it away. If a lot of them die we might get another ant farm, or we might try something different. In this analogy, Sune compels some ants to do stuff for her, to further her agenda. The ants die. Meh... there are plenty of other ants in the farm, and they reproduce like Whoa.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

How can I ever again see Sune as a good, noble goddess in the Realms, if she condones and encourages magically-induced rape? How do I ever see Sune as the goddess of actual, real love, when an enhanced magical charm is considered equivalent?


Well, I honestly don't mean to be a jerk, but this response is what comes to me: you kinda set yourself up for this dilemma by limiting Sune to being noble. She's the goddess of love... that says a lot more than just Valentine's Day and scented letters and puppies and rose petals. Love causes jealousy, which inspires vindictiveness and rage and in some cases murder. Love causes heartache, which often leads to depression and occasionally to suicide. Love isn't always monogamous (or hetero), and that can be confusing/hurtful to some folks. In short, love is not just what an individual wants it to be. There is darkness as well as light.

Love is love. It matters not to Sune whether it results from years of growing familiarity and dependence and some mystical flowering of emotional connection (which is not predictable or under the control of those involved) or whether it comes as a result of an irresistible charm spell. Except that the first one is long and boring, while the second is quick and efficient.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

How do I tell my players that magically charming a tavern wench and using her sexually isn't an evil, criminal act? Particularly when a good goddess like Sune encourages her own Chosen to do the same exact thing? In Cormyr and many other places in the Realms, magical compulsion to have forced sex is a serious crime - right? The fact that Arietta was highly confused afterwards wasn't because she was struggling with real feelings, it was because she was suffering from a Chosen-enhanced magical compulsion. Is this really moral and right in Sune's view?


Well, there is a difference between PCs doing stuff to NPCs and a power doing the same things to a mortal, or encouraging/inspiring a mortal to do those things to another mortal. I honestly think regarding morality in objective terms is limiting the perspective too much. It's not my intent to say "it's okay for a goddess to do something that's not okay for PCs to do" but that's going to be how it comes out.

Yes, I think Sune sees what she does as acceptable/advantageous. And it's not that she's evil... it's just that she encompasses all of love and its causes and effects, rather than just the stuff that poets write about. It isn't evil, per se... it's embodying her portfolio. Similarly, an act of murder isn't wrong to Bhaal... killing is the essence of who he is. We regard Bhaal as a bad guy because we have declared murder to be evil, and he's all about the murder. We regard Sune as good because we have decided that love (the parts of it that we like, at least) is a great thing. There's more to Sune than falling in love, just like there's more to Bhaal than sticking a knife in someone. The lord of murder would scoff at limiting oneself to one weapon.

Edit: instead of saying that she encompasses all of love's effects (which I said above) it would probably be more accurate to say that Sune doesn't necessarily care about the consequences of love; she isn't going to refrain from causing someone to experience love based on the chance that it will make that person miserable at some point in the future. Her prime directive is to create love. Others can deal with the consequences.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

Was I mistaken to believe that real, true love was Sune's primary portfolio/goal?


If you're defining "real, true love" as being only the "sittin in a tree, k-i-s-s-i-n-g" type of love, then in my personal opinion you were mistaken. Well, more limited rather than mistaken. Love is Sune's goal. Causes and effects are less relevant than the strength of the feeling.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

Does Sune have a different interpretation of rape, compared to the legal systems of Cormyr and Waterdeep?


I would expect so, yes. Very yes.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

How do I square what happened in that novel with who I thought Sune was, and what I thought she stood for as a good-aligned goddess?


I'm not sure that I've adequately addressed this, but I don't think I have anything else to add. Just that (1) Sune is all flavors and forms of love, and (2) alignment doesn't need to be relevant to her, and probably shouldn't be.

All just my 2 coppers.

Edited by - xaeyruudh on 25 Apr 2014 00:09:00

George Krashos
Master of Realmslore

Australia
6638 Posts

Posted - 24 Apr 2014 :  08:07:27  Show Profile Send George Krashos a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I agree that love can be "beautiful". It can also be destructive, myopic and lead to behaviours that are intrinsically "not good". Let's be clear - there are lots of different types of 'love'. All-consuming, selective ("I love you for your body and nothing else ...") and most important of all ... unconditional. Sune will take any type of love and support any type of love. The behaviours that flow from it are irrelevant.

-- George Krashos

"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus
Go to Top of Page

Demzer
Senior Scribe

873 Posts

Posted - 24 Apr 2014 :  09:26:24  Show Profile Send Demzer a Private Message  Reply with Quote
It's Troy Denning portraying Faerunian gods and their actions and you are surprised everything seems f****d up? After reading Crucible either you believe Troy's take that gods are bumbling buffoons and Malik is the ultimate super munchkin of doom (even before the whole immortality nonsense) or you just say "meh" to most everything godly related he writes and think of it as the work of Cyric the Prince of Lies (i mean, hey, Ed talks with El so maybe Troy talks with Malik or Cyric himself).

Edited by - Demzer on 24 Apr 2014 09:27:01
Go to Top of Page

TBeholder
Great Reader

2376 Posts

Posted - 24 Apr 2014 :  14:29:21  Show Profile Send TBeholder a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh

quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

First and foremost, it strongly suggests that a magically-induced love charm is viewed as actual love by the goddess Sune.
It probably is. I'm not justifying that view; I'm just saying it's logical for Sune to see no problem with magically inducing love in whomever, for whatever purpose she sees fit.
IMO, the root of problems here are a few of arbitrary notions accepted as axioms, and "effect of Charm is not 'real' love" is the key one.
To me, it looks bizarre - it's the same as saying that "effect of Spooks is not 'real' fear". It very much is, that's the whole point.

quote:
Originally posted by Demzer

It's Troy Denning portraying Faerunian gods and their actions and you are surprised everything seems f****d up? After reading Crucible either you believe Troy's take that gods are bumbling buffoons
That, too. The part where they barely can understand each other due to looking (and existing) through the portfolio have a merit, however.
quote:
and Malik is the ultimate super munchkin of doom
Well, yes. The man have a fuzzy idea of where to stop... hmm, he could do great writing about elves - they usually have it even fuzzier.
quote:
(even before the whole immortality nonsense)
Why nonsense? Gods screwing around with mortals in order to screw over each other is nothing unusual.

People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch
Go to Top of Page

xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore

USA
1853 Posts

Posted - 25 Apr 2014 :  00:03:04  Show Profile  Visit xaeyruudh's Homepage Send xaeyruudh a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

In the real (modern) world, we certainly draw a distinction between rape and love. In the past, such violence toward women (when motivated by a man's desire, obsession and lust) wasn't always deemed rape.


I believe that distinction is there in the Realms, as well, at least in most places at most times. There are undoubtedly exceptions, born of things which don't have great parallels in our time/place. The existence/acknowledgement of a whole pantheon of gods -- multiple pantheons, in fact, changes some things. The existence of magic changes a whole bunch of things.

Of direct relevance is last part of what you said... even here on Earth, rape hasn't always been called rape. One reason for this is that women (even wives, sisters, daughters, and nieces, to say nothing of literally purchased slaves) were regarded as property. This might seem barbaric to us now, but it was normal then/there and in fact men fought to protect their "rights" to own women, to keep women from voting, etc.

In some parts of the Realms, depending on the DM of course, this view of women may still be normal. I don't think of Thay or Zhentil Keep, for example, as places of gender equality or equal opportunity for all citizens.

I think the concept of consent has to exist in the Realms, but it's significantly blurred by the existence of magic... the school of enchantment offers a list of ways to mitigate the need for permission or "please and thank you."

The plurality of gods is also relevant because some churches look a lot like the streets of Zhentil Keep and Thay. Within the churches of Bane and Loviatar, I think it's fair to say that everyone is owned by the higher ranks. Same with the cults/churches of Gargauth and any other demon/devil. "Rape" doesn't really exist there; those with power do as they please with their subordinates.

With more gentility, I think some of this would be true within the hierarchy of Sune, and Sharess and Hanali too. Being a servant of Sune implies a great deal of consent to the wishes of her other servants. After all, if you're not a lover, how is it that you're interested in serving Sune? So a priestess of Sune who spends most of her time in a temple (and seriously: why would she want to be anywhere else?) would be accustomed to a great deal of permissiveness; showing it toward her higher-ups and teaching it to anyone she's mentoring. She would likely be continually offended and saddened by the treatment those outside Sune's clergy subject one another to. She would also believe, with unshakable conviction, that "the service of Sune attracts the most generous and kind people" and as both a cause and effect of that, "our way is sooooo much better than (insert other church here)."

So a priestess of Sune has her own ideas (well, technically the church's ideas but she adopts them as her own) of how the world should be, and she rationally regards her own view as superior to those of outsiders, at least in the areas of being more loving (duh) and respectful and kind.

This is all a rather wordy way of suggesting that when Sune gives her chosen the ability to charm others, it's not necessarily described in terms of taking advantage of anyone. Sune is not a moocher -- she will often accept favors offered by sincere admirers, and she might use her power to induce admiration when it's not already present, but she's not dependent on gifts. And neither are her priestesses. Gifts and favors are just that; gifts and favors, not a welfare check. The charm is absolutely not about rape, or violation or pain of any kind.

The ability to charm others is a tool for sharing the glory of Sune's enlightened service. When Joelle charms Arietta, it doesn't have to be about using her... it might easily be about educating her.

The suicide thing is a separate issue, and I'm guessing it has zilch to do with Joelle. I haven't read the book so I'm just guessing here, but it fits.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

For genuine love to exist, I always took the stance that two people (or more, depending on circumstances) had mutual feelings. Or is it only necessary for the aggressor to have the emotion(s) as far as the goddess Sune is concerned?


I think this stance is limiting, but it also skips over something that I think is important regarding consent and therefore the definition of rape.

For the duration of the charm, the love is genuine. It sounds like no physical coercion was applied, and no threats were made. They were utterly unnecessary. While affected by the charm, Arietta was "in love" and fully complicit with any/all physical manifestations of love. She consented... in fact she could have even initiated it. It was not rape.

Any feelings of confusion Arietta had would have come after the charm expired and she was once more in control of her own feelings. She remembers what she did a little while ago, and she remembers having overwhelmingly positive feelings, but she has no idea where those feelings came from. I would be confused in that situation, too. Happy, but... happiness is kinda diminished when you have no idea where it came from or why, and no way to bring it back when you want it.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

But Joelle did use her enhanced magical charm on Arietta in order to remove her free will and change her emotional state. So while it appears somewhat passive, Joelle invasively took magical control to make the encounter happen, with the purpose of getting Arietta to later commit suicide for her.


Was Joelle thinking "I'm going to make Arietta fall in love with me so that I can make her kill herself" or was she unaware that the suicide was coming?

That's probably not actually the point, because that was Sune's motive rather than Joelle's, and the servant of a goddess (particularly a goddess of enchantment) does the bidding of her goddess.

So the real issue is that Sune compelled her chosen to charm people, and she did this with the intent of making the charmed individuals kill themselves. Joelle is a pawn, and for all practical purposes innocent.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

Perhaps Sune did condone and even prompt Joelle to do this. If so, this dramatically alters my entire perception of Sune.


Yarr, this be the rub. I think it's explainable by way of the situation, though. And since I haven't read the book (or any of the Sundering books, actually... give me paperbacks!) yet, I'll have to rely on others to fill in the specifics.

But Ed says the situation was desperate:

quote:
Originally posted by The Hooded One

Ed also added that everything was chaotic and on the gods' part desperate...in a last-minute struggle for power, during the Sundering, so many over-the-line uncharacteristic things were done and attempted.


A struggle for power. That says to me that it was set up so that mortals who die in the service of a particular power strengthen that power. When someone dies while in love, or pursuing love, Sune gets a spark of power. If this is the only way she sees to maintain her power, or indeed her existence, then guess what: mortals are less important to Sune than Sune is to Sune. In particular, mortals charmed away from other powers into serving the interests of love... those mortals are the best candidates for sparking.

It's not that Sune isn't Good... it's a question of what will she do in self-defense? Would you refuse to kill some ants, if it meant that all the love would go out of the world? That's probably how Sune sees herself... she is love, and without her there is no love.
Go to Top of Page

hashimashadoo
Master of Realmslore

United Kingdom
1150 Posts

Posted - 25 Apr 2014 :  17:36:01  Show Profile  Visit hashimashadoo's Homepage Send hashimashadoo a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Remember too that Sune is also the goddess of passion and actively encouraged her clergy to inspire desire in others.

Some people may call using enchantments to get sex rape, but if that was a universal opinion, then we wouldn't have philtres of love for sale in magic shops. As for forcing people into self-sacrifice, Sune probably reasoned that if her Chosen couldn't achieve her mission then the Sundering could potentially be a threat to love itself and therefore the ends had to justify the means.

When life turns it's back on you...sneak attack for extra damage.

Head admin of the FR wiki:

https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/
Go to Top of Page

TBeholder
Great Reader

2376 Posts

Posted - 25 Apr 2014 :  19:24:30  Show Profile Send TBeholder a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by hashimashadoo

then we wouldn't have philtres of love for sale in magic shops.
It's stated to be on sale just like this? Where?

People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch
Go to Top of Page

Eltheron
Senior Scribe

740 Posts

Posted - 25 Apr 2014 :  20:50:19  Show Profile Send Eltheron a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Xaeyruudh: thank you for taking the discussion and moving it into a new thread. I just wish you or someone had given me a "heads up" on the new thread, though, considering the copy/pasting of my posts. It makes it look like I was aware of this thread and actively participating here, when the reality is that I just found it several minutes ago.

I am glad that the discussion is continuing, I just wish I'd known about it sooner.

A couple specific points in this thread I'd like to address:

1. If Sune should be viewed in this rather different light of "all forms" of love, I'm not necessarily arguing against that. However, I also would then object to her being Chaotic Good. Love can be dark and ugly, one-sided and dangerously obsessive, even harmful in some cases. BUT, if Sune represents and effectively condones all of that, then her description needs a re-write and her alignment needs a correction.

2. I don't recall seeing "philtres" of love (potions) but I do know about Elixirs of Love. The latter involves a 1-3 hour Charm Person effect, as per the spell, with an initial Will save allowed. This isn't love - it's a magical charm that temporarily convinces the target you're a trusted friend or ally. Furthermore, Charm Person can easily break if the person is asked to do something that threatens their life or goes significantly against their character (generate CHA or Will checks, with modifiers appropriate to the request). "Regular" magical charm has definite limits, and isn't love. As a Chosen of Sune, Joelle had an empowered, god-granted version of charm, which I wouldn't call "love" either. Technically, we don't know the mechanics or the limits, except that it couldn't fully charm Kleef, another Chosen.

3. For physical coercion vs. magical coercion, I really don't draw much of a distinction. The end product, ultimately, is a person who was coerced to do something they would not normally do.

4. I know that, particularly with Denning's novels, the gods are often portrayed as nearly being idiots or at least having massive blinders on when "seeing" anything outside of their portfolio. Personally, I never subscribed to this vision of the gods because it limited them and their perceptions too much for them to be considered actual gods. That's just my opinion, of course, and probably doesn't have much to do with the canon Realms. In my Realms, Sune simply would not act this way or endorse these attitudes in her followers (and it also doesn't mean that my Sune is "vanilla" or chaste or any other things people seem to imply that I'm thinking). I simply draw a distinction between what's genuine and what is magically induced. Magic that changes emotions or thoughts may feel authentic for the duration of the charm or effect, but they're not genuine or real IMO.

5. As I mentioned in one of my original posts, I'm very aware of the different historical perceptions about rape (and about women in general). That said, the Realms have always seemed (and have been presented) to me as being far more socially progressive than much of the historical real world when it comes to issues of gender, power, and sexuality. Yes, there's massive window dressing of historical Renaissance and Medieval themes. The allure of roleplay comes directly out of that: it's period drama, but with far more evolved social progressiveness. The values of most Cormyreans and Waterdhavians aren't equivalent to real world historical Medieval~Renaissance values, they're more in line with our modern values. As such, and since I am the one who is playing the game, it's jarring when my values are confronted by something in game - and again, this is a rather dramatically different perspective on Sune than has ever been portrayed in prior sourcebooks or novels.

6. Joelle was fully aware of Sune's requirement of a "self sacrifice" for "love" while also being utterly pragmatic about obtaining it for her. Joelle repeatedly tried charming her male companion (Kleef) but it kept failing because he was another Chosen. Joelle finally gave up and charmed Arietta (who, at the time, was not a Chosen). At no point prior to this did Joelle or Arietta express deeper affections for each other than a basic friendship, so this "love" was entirely generated out of Joelle's empowered Charm and Sune's requirement of a suicidal sacrifice. Nothing about it felt real or genuine, and even Arietta was confused by her feelings - having never been with another woman, or even attracted to one, apparently. It also didn't read like Joelle was "educating" Arietta or opening her up to something real, it just rang wholly untrue. It just seems to me that a Goddess of Love would reject magical charming as being genuine love.


"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer

Edited by - Eltheron on 25 Apr 2014 21:36:54
Go to Top of Page

xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore

USA
1853 Posts

Posted - 25 Apr 2014 :  22:51:06  Show Profile  Visit xaeyruudh's Homepage Send xaeyruudh a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

Xaeyruudh: thank you for taking the discussion and moving it into a new thread. I just wish you or someone had given me a "heads up" on the new thread, though, considering the copy/pasting of my posts. It makes it look like I was aware of this thread and actively participating here, when the reality is that I just found it several minutes ago.


Ah, my apologies. I'm so used to clicking "Active Topics" that I sometimes forget that new threads are often missed by anyone who doesn't go looking for them.

I think I was careful to use quotes to make it known that I was simply reacting to what you had posted elsewhere. I'll check again.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

1. If Sune should be viewed in this rather different light of "all forms" of love, I'm not necessarily arguing against that. However, I also would then object to her being Chaotic Good. Love can be dark and ugly, one-sided and dangerously obsessive, even harmful in some cases. BUT, if Sune represents and effectively condones all of that, then her description needs a re-write and her alignment needs a correction.


Love itself isn't dark or ugly. It can have dire consequences, and it can be "expressed poorly" and it can result in unintentional as well as intentional heartache or unpleasantness, but those expressions and consequences come from the hearts and minds of mortals... not from some intrinsic property of love itself. Love never inspires rape; twisted minds came up with rape and if we were able to compel perfect honesty from the perpetrator we would see that there is in fact no love present when harm is caused. If we were being technical, we would have to say that "sometimes people get jealous" rather than "sometimes love causes jealousy." Love itself is not evil, and does not cause pain, and therefore the goddess of love should not be evil. It's not Sune's fault, after all, that some mortals commit atrocities in the name of love.

When it's expressed well, and when it's welcomed and shared, and when it lasts as long as we want it to --or more accurately while it's gripping us-- love is purely positive, or in terms of alignment, purely good.

So I'm cool with Sune being the goddess of love/passion/ardor/affection, and being classified as good.

I can see how this might seem like a turn-around from saying that she's the goddess of all love, and all its expressions, but I think this is a better way of saying it: she's the goddess of love... everything that love entails, but wholly independent of how aberrant mortals experience or express it. She's the goddess of pure love. She is not the goddess of rape, though she probably has a pretty ambivalent stance regarding consent in many circumstances due to the positive effects it brings.

For my own games I will play Sune as not caring about consent as long as no harm is done. No physical harm, no mental harm... love is fun and exciting and cathartic and celebratory. It's what gives meaning to life. Pain and misery are antithetical to love, so in cases where love brings someone no happiness Sune is not on board.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

2. I don't recall seeing "philtres" of love (potions) but I do know about Elixirs of Love. The latter involves a 1-3 hour Charm Person effect, as per the spell, with an initial Will save allowed. This doesn't really seem to qualify as a form of love - it's a magical charm. I would not consider this to be real or genuine. Furthermore, Charm Person will break if the person is asked to do something that threatens their life or goes significantly against their character. Ordinary magical charm only goes so far. As a Chosen of Sune, Joelle had an empowered, god-granted version of charm. Technically, we don't know the mechanics or the limits, except that it couldn't fully charm Kleef, another Chosen.


Philtres of love were from 1st edition. The charm lasts 1d4+4 turns, but the person drinking it is "enamored" of the first creature seen and that lasts until a dispel magic is cast on them.

The point, for me at least, is that while the charm is active the charmed person is experiencing love. It might not be real in the sense that it's magically induced and has a predetermined duration, but it's very real during that duration, for the person experiencing it.

It's real because the actions of the charmed person are not dictated. Arietta felt love --intense, passionate love-- for Joelle, but she chose to act on it or to go along with Joelle's suggestions. Once the charm was active, what happened after that was Arietta's choice just as much as it was Joelle's.

Yes, it only happened because of the charm. But once the charm was there, what followed was "organic" not compelled.

I still haven't read it, so I'm out of my element talking about what's on the page, but this is the impression I've gotten.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

3. For physical coercion vs. magical coercion, I really don't draw much of a distinction. The end product, ultimately, is a person who was coerced to do something they would not normally do.


In cases where a person is magically compelled to do something, I agree that it's the same as physically compelling them to do that thing.

But charm is (usually) a case where someone's emotional state is altered. They suddenly like you a lot more than they did before. And you can take advantage of that because their emotions have been tampered with, not because performance of any particular task was directly or even indirectly compelled. Nothing in the spell description says the affected person will do your laundry for you. It just makes them favorably disposed to do whatever you want them to do.

As you said, this was a goddess-empowered charm. That's why suicide made it onto the list of things that could be successfully suggested. Though even with a normal charm it's possible to trick someone into doing something which will kill them. If the charm directly compelled Arietta to do specific things, rather than simply making her feel a deep desire to serve Joelle's best interests, then I stand corrected.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

4. I know that, particularly with Denning's novels, the gods are often portrayed as nearly being idiots or at least having massive blinders on when "seeing" anything outside of their portfolio. Personally, I never subscribed to this vision of the gods because it limited them and their perceptions too much for them to be considered actual gods. That's just my opinion, of course, and probably doesn't have much to do with the canon Realms. In my Realms, Sune simply would not act this way or endorse these attitudes in her followers (and it also doesn't mean that my Sune is "vanilla" or chaste or any other things people seem to imply that I'm thinking). I simply draw a distinction between what's genuine and what is magically induced. Magic that changes emotions or thoughts may feel authentic for the duration of the charm or effect, but they're not genuine or real IMO.


I agree that portraying the gods as idiots is frustrating. Sometimes it seems that we're in the minority, but at least we're not alone.

And fair enough, regarding distinguishing real vs magically induced feelings. This explains your difficulty in resolving the Sune in the novel with the Sune in your game, though. My suggestion is expanding your definition of Sune, but I didn't mean to beat a dead horse by going into detail or mentioning it several times. I understand (now) that you've deliberately chosen to define her in this way.

The biggest problem I see is the fact that the charm resulted in death. It's no longer about increasing the love in the world or bringing pleasure to her followers, and it really doesn't matter that it altered people's emotions... she's killing people, and it's pretty impossible to picture a goddess of love willingly being a part of that.

So I guess that's the part of the problem to attack. What made Sune so desperate that she had to compel suicide? (How many deaths are we talking about here, anyway?) Maybe the answers are forthcoming in The Herald.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

5. As I mentioned in one of my original posts, I'm very aware of the different historical perceptions about rape (and about women in general). That said, the Realms have always seemed (and have been presented) to me as being far more socially progressive than much of the historical real world when it comes to issues of gender, power, and sexuality. Yes, there's massive window dressing of historical Renaissance and Medieval themes. The allure of roleplay comes directly out of that: it's period drama, but with far more evolved social progressiveness. The values of most Cormyreans and Waterdhavians aren't equivalent to real world historical Medieval~Renaissance values, they're more in line with our modern values. As such, and since I am the one who is playing the game, it's jarring when my values are confronted by something in game - and again, this is a rather dramatically different perspective on Sune than has ever been portrayed in prior sourcebooks or novels.


I hear you here. The impression that most folks are more evolved in their views of sex and gender, less prudish and less cruel in these areas, is appealing for me too. I can play male or female characters who command equal stature in the majority of cultures they come in contact with. I can't really do that, without breaking the 4th wall, in Masque of the Red Death -- which probably seems like a random example but it occurs to me because I've been dabbling in revamping it for 4e and then 5e. Anyway, I like the egalitarian aspect of the Realms, and I'm resolved to preserve it in my games. If the plot devices of the The Sentinel don't uphold it, then The Sentinel loses brownie points.


quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron

6. Joelle was fully aware of Sune's requirement of a "self sacrifice" for "love" while also being utterly pragmatic about obtaining it for her. Joelle repeatedly tried charming her male companion (Kleef) but it kept failing because he was another Chosen. Joelle finally gave up and charmed Arietta (who, at the time, was not a Chosen). At no point prior to this did Joelle or Arietta express deeper affections for each other than a basic friendship, so this "love" was entirely generated out of Joelle's empowered Charm and Sune's requirement of a suicidal sacrifice. Nothing about it felt real or genuine, and even Arietta was confused by her feelings - having never been with another woman, or even attracted to one, apparently. It also didn't read like Joelle was "educating" Arietta or opening her up to something real, it just rang wholly untrue. It just seems to me that a Goddess of Love would reject magical charming as being genuine love.


Ah, I see. Well, that affirms my suggestion that Sune feels her existence depends on the "sparks" she gets from people dying for her. I agree that this sounds evil, at least on the surface, but I think pragmatic is a good word for Sune's actions as well as Joelle's. Sune clearly saw a greater good coming from using Joelle and Arietta. It's possible that she's cracked, and will be CN in 5e. It's also possible that she will experience profound remorse, and/or resurrect Arietta or raise her to be a planetar to make up for cutting her life short. I'm curious to see what's in the long-range plans.

I'm trying not to anticipate them dropping the whole Sundering thing the instant the last book is out to prepare for the next RSE. It seems likely that the Tyranny of Dragons will consume their attention (for a little bit) and they'll probably never go back and clear things up. They didn't clean up the Spellplague. They dropped the TOT as soon as it was over. They didn't really follow through in any meaningful way with the return of Shade. No way to know if they'll ever develop the return of Myth Drannor or that city in old Miyeritar. Flashes in the pan and then on to the next thing. Failtechnique.

Oh, right. Be positive. Mah bad.

Bottom line: I think Sune is a nice (and naughty) girl in a bad place mentally. Quite possibly with bad taste in friends; this sounds like the sort of thing a bad boyfriend convinces his girlfriend to do in order to "be cool" in his eyes. Maybe it's a plot twist: Sune's been charmed. I hope she figures it out and pulls her butt outta the fire.

Edited by - xaeyruudh on 25 Apr 2014 22:52:29
Go to Top of Page

Eltheron
Senior Scribe

740 Posts

Posted - 26 Apr 2014 :  02:41:37  Show Profile Send Eltheron a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh

Ah, my apologies. I'm so used to clicking "Active Topics" that I sometimes forget that new threads are often missed by anyone who doesn't go looking for them.

It's all good really. I'm glad for the new thread, so we don't flood Ed's Q&A thread with a tangential discussion. I did go looking for a new thread after THO mentioned it, but I just didn't see it.

quote:
Love itself isn't dark or ugly. It can have dire consequences, and it can be "expressed poorly" and it can result in unintentional as well as intentional heartache or unpleasantness, but those expressions and consequences come from the hearts and minds of mortals... not from some intrinsic property of love itself. Love never inspires rape; twisted minds came up with rape and if we were able to compel perfect honesty from the perpetrator we would see that there is in fact no love present when harm is caused. If we were being technical, we would have to say that "sometimes people get jealous" rather than "sometimes love causes jealousy." Love itself is not evil, and does not cause pain, and therefore the goddess of love should not be evil. It's not Sune's fault, after all, that some mortals commit atrocities in the name of love.

I suppose much of this comes down to how love is defined, particularly the breadth of the definition. THO mentioned that "Sune is about ALL love, including murderous passion, the sort of tragic misunderstandings that Shakespeare's Hamlet and Othello both turn on, and obsession/stalking, not just the light and pleasant bits."

So if this is indeed true, I don't think we can allow Sune to have the cake (all the good parts) without the dirty cake dish afterwards. When I said that "love can also be dark and ugly" I was referring to the inclusion of murderous passions, Hamlet's truly awful treatment of Ophelia, Othello's (and Iago's) murderous jealousies, and even something like the dark poetry of John Donne where he suggests that love is a sickness that can poison the soul.

It's also why I tried to clarify with Ed and THO whether or not Sune represented (or somehow oversees) one-sided love that is unrequited or even outright rejected, because love can easily twist in such cases toward all those uncomfortable, darker things noted above.

If Sune oversees ALL forms of love, including the darker forms, then love is neither good nor evil but a continuum - and Sune's alignment should reflect that. Similarly, War is neither inherently good nor purely evil and depends hugely on context and the players involved.

quote:
When it's expressed well, and when it's welcomed and shared, and when it lasts as long as we want it to --or more accurately while it's gripping us-- love is purely positive, or in terms of alignment, purely good.

So I'm cool with Sune being the goddess of love/passion/ardor/affection, and being classified as good.

In my original interpretation of Sune, which isn't just me but based on the write-ups for Sune, this is something I would've agreed with completely.

quote:
I can see how this might seem like a turn-around from saying that she's the goddess of all love, and all its expressions, but I think this is a better way of saying it: she's the goddess of love... everything that love entails, but wholly independent of how aberrant mortals experience or express it.

But I'm not sure I agree fully with this above. Based on what we know of the gods and how they work in the canon Realms, I don't think we can say that Sune is wholly independent of mortal beliefs about love.

quote:
She's the goddess of pure love. She is not the goddess of rape, though she probably has a pretty ambivalent stance regarding consent in many circumstances due to the positive effects it brings.

For my own games I will play Sune as not caring about consent as long as no harm is done. No physical harm, no mental harm... love is fun and exciting and cathartic and celebratory. It's what gives meaning to life. Pain and misery are antithetical to love, so in cases where love brings someone no happiness Sune is not on board.

Just as my interpretation seemed limited, I'm going to suggest that yours may possibly be limited here. I don't mean this in a negative or confrontational way, nor do I mean to be rude in any way.

There are forms of love, in classic study, that do not require happiness, necessarily. Commitment to a purpose is classically thought of as a form of love, for what it's worth.

Also, pain and misery are often highly lauded elements of certain types of unrequited love, courtly love poetry, or the "necessary distance" some people create when they do not believe they can ever be with the person they love.

If we're going to insist that Sune is about ALL forms of love, then I don't think we can pick and choose what culturally or personally seems best in our own estimations. We have to take the dirty cake plate along with the delicious cake.

quote:
Philtres of love were from 1st edition. The charm lasts 1d4+4 turns, but the person drinking it is "enamored" of the first creature seen and that lasts until a dispel magic is cast on them.

Ah, I remember this now. It also reminds me of why certain elements of AD&D were unfair (e.g. no saves in some cases, poorly defined status effects that removed choice or control from a player). Still, in reviewing what the AD&D DM guide has to say about this, even someone Charmed and Enamored by a Philtre of Love isn't a slave. Their feelings are altered, certainly, but:

quote:
The point, for me at least, is that while the charm is active the charmed person is experiencing love. It might not be real in the sense that it's magically induced and has a predetermined duration, but it's very real during that duration, for the person experiencing it.

Here's where I'm going to strongly disagree. They are experiencing what feels or seems like love. But it's an effect completely out of their control or choice. I would argue that it isn't real. It just seems real.

quote:
It's real because the actions of the charmed person are not dictated. Arietta felt love --intense, passionate love-- for Joelle, but she chose to act on it or to go along with Joelle's suggestions. Once the charm was active, what happened after that was Arietta's choice just as much as it was Joelle's.

I really disagree with this. There's a reason, in law, why "under the influence" is such a huge deal. Being under the influence changes what you would really, truly do in a given circumstance. It removes choice from the equation. The person may be responding, and in a way that is consistent with their imposed new (temporary) beliefs, but this isn't truly them and they're not responsible for their actions while "under the influence" and not fully in control of themselves.

It's not real IMO, because of the magical charm. It's not "organic" in the sense that this is what the person would have chosen to do - being under the influence of magic, especially magic that changes your mental state, emotions and beliefs, is not organic at all. It's explainable and perhaps predictable because the charm is pushing someone toward a given end-goal, but it's not organic or real.

quote:
And fair enough, regarding distinguishing real vs magically induced feelings. This explains your difficulty in resolving the Sune in the novel with the Sune in your game, though. My suggestion is expanding your definition of Sune, but I didn't mean to beat a dead horse by going into detail or mentioning it several times. I understand (now) that you've deliberately chosen to define her in this way.

To be fair, I don't think it was just me who chose to see Sune in the way I did. Sune's write-ups have always focused on the lighter, pleasant sides of love, suggesting mutual feelings and so forth. They have noted how Sune and her priesthood are often seen as not only shallow but sometimes outright awful to priests and the faithful when it comes to loss of charisma, old age, or physical marring. But seeing Sune as the goddess of "ALL love, including the darker sides" isn't something I've ever seen before in the material.

And to be honest, I'm not sure I want to re-orient how I have seen Sune in my own games. It incorporates too much darkness into Sune for my tastes.

quote:
The biggest problem I see is the fact that the charm resulted in death. It's no longer about increasing the love in the world or bringing pleasure to her followers, and it really doesn't matter that it altered people's emotions... she's killing people, and it's pretty impossible to picture a goddess of love willingly being a part of that.

Well, technically Arietta didn't commit suicide for Joelle. She was fully ready to do so, though, having been "convinced" by the magical charm. But in the end, Joelle is the one who dies (she gets murdered by Malik), and it's really not at all clear whether or not she sacrificed herself.

Still, it's disturbing to me that Sune would have asked for a suicidal sacrifice at all. It's possible that Joelle may have chosen to die for Arietta or Kleef, or even for her goddess. It could have been that Joelle finally learned what true love was, and what genuine self-sacrifice was truly all about in those final moments. But the story isn't really presented that way at all. The death scene is rather jumbled and unclear, so the death came across as rather meaningless and unnecessary IMO.

quote:
So I guess that's the part of the problem to attack. What made Sune so desperate that she had to compel suicide? (How many deaths are we talking about here, anyway?) Maybe the answers are forthcoming in The Herald.

Apparently, Sune's required sacrifice only needed one person, in the final moment of the ritual. This was related early on by Joelle to Malik.

quote:
Well, that affirms my suggestion that Sune feels her existence depends on the "sparks" she gets from people dying for her. I agree that this sounds evil, at least on the surface, but I think pragmatic is a good word for Sune's actions as well as Joelle's. Sune clearly saw a greater good coming from using Joelle and Arietta. It's possible that she's cracked, and will be CN in 5e. It's also possible that she will experience profound remorse, and/or resurrect Arietta or raise her to be a planetar to make up for cutting her life short. I'm curious to see what's in the long-range plans.

Joelle certainly was entirely pragmatic for the entirety of the novel, fully dedicated to positively getting what Sune required. To be honest, though, I'm not much enamored of people or gods that are entirely pragmatic. Sune and the other gods may be desperate, but I don't think pragmatism excuses them from acting in good and noble ways when they are ostensibly good and noble deities. I've always seen Sune as somewhat capricious, even flighty. But never ever would I have pictured her requiring someone to commit a suicidal self-sacrifice. It seems too much in contrast to who and what she is and represents.

quote:
I'm trying not to anticipate them dropping the whole Sundering thing the instant the last book is out to prepare for the next RSE. It seems likely that the Tyranny of Dragons will consume their attention (for a little bit) and they'll probably never go back and clear things up. They didn't clean up the Spellplague. They dropped the TOT as soon as it was over. They didn't really follow through in any meaningful way with the return of Shade. No way to know if they'll ever develop the return of Myth Drannor or that city in old Miyeritar. Flashes in the pan and then on to the next thing. Failtechnique.

Oh, right. Be positive. Mah bad.

Heh, yeah, I definitely hear you on that.

Still, I hope for the best. And Ed's the best chance we have for a brighter Realms that gets back to making some sense.


"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer
Go to Top of Page

Aldrick
Senior Scribe

909 Posts

Posted - 26 Apr 2014 :  13:14:23  Show Profile Send Aldrick a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I don't so much mind the shift in the perspective of Sune to include ALL aspects of love. As you pointed out, Eltheron, Tempus incorporates all aspects of war - not just the fighting-for-noble-reasons bits.

If Sune didn't include all aspects of love, then it's quite possible another deity could start to move in on those aspects of her portfolio. I could certainly see Shar wanting to take those darker aspects, considering she's already the Lady of Loss. She's already also highly associated with jealousy and other such negative emotions as well. So, that's likely who benefits if Sune isn't making active claims.

We've seen similar battles between Talos and Mystra, where Talos has attempted to weasel his control over wild and/or destructive magic.

It also probably doesn't bother me as much, because I don't put a huge stock in deity alignments. I view the alignments for deities more from the perspective of mortals. It's how mortals choose to see the deities, and how they choose to worship them. In Sune's case her cult tries to focus on the lighter and happier bits of love, and Sune supports that - of course - so she gets her Chaotic Good alignment.

That doesn't necessarily mean that there aren't some sects of her cult that don't focus on the darker bits. They could even be viewed as heretics by the orthodox aspects of her cult.

To me, this potential adds additional complexity to Sune that didn't exist before - which is why I like it.

Of course, this is also the problem with having deities directly involved in the stories at all. It lends too much credence to correct and incorrect interpretations. It's always better if they are more remote, and communicate only through cryptic dream visions or strange signs. That way we can have mortals who have honest disagreements, without having a deity show up and tell everyone exactly the way it should be - or just as bad... a deity who doesn't show up and inform people that they're wrong, when they could easily do so, simply to make things more mysterious.

========

When it comes to the issue of Joelle and Arietta, not having read the book, I'm at a bit of a disadvantage. I'd have to say I'm more frustrated for real world reasons than for fiction reasons, namely in how a potential lesbian / bisexual relationship was treated. "Lesbian / bisexual woman uses magic to (perceivably) rape another woman..." ugh. Whenever someone is writing a character of a minority group, they should always begin by asking one important question: "Am I unintentionally playing into any common and offensive stereotypes?" It's like only writing female characters that are either cold-hearted bitches or sex-obsessed nymphomaniacs.

Suggesting or equating gay sex with rape, suggesting that gay people use manipulative tactics (in this case magic) to convert / sway straight people, and a whole mess of other things are all suggested by this action. I'm sure it's unintentional on the authors part, but unfortunately that's what some people are going to read into it.

Also, if I'm not mistaken Arietta ends up with Kleef, the straight guy in the story at the end. Ugh. Ugh. Ugh. That's like twisting the knife, right there.

So, for me... I'm cringing at this aspect of things. A few minor tweaks could have fixed all of this...

========

Moving back to the fiction, I am trying to imagine how things look from the perspective of Sune. I am not sure that I agree with you Eltheron, in that magically induced love is somehow not "real" love. Love is an emotion, just like fear.

If a Banite wizard chains someone up and casts Fear on them repeatedly, does that somehow make that fear not real fear? I think from the perspective of the person who is chained up, under the effects of the magic, that they'd strongly disagree. Even after the magic is no longer in effect, if you ask them if they were terrified, they'd almost certainly tell you: Yes, absolutely.

That's because what they were feeling was genuine feelings and emotions. They were just emotions that were forced upon them via the magic. I can understand the argument that it isn't organic, but not that it's not "real" - you could argue that it's somehow a form of "lesser love" because it didn't arise "organically and naturally". However, that's more a matter of opinion than what an individual actually felt.

The big issue here is free will. Does Sune give two craps about the free will of mortals? I think from the perspective of most of the deities mortal free will is probably viewed as a pesky nuisance. It's fine so long as mortals are choosing to do what they want mortals to do, and it's problematic when mortals are choosing to do something counter to the deities wishes.

However, things are a bit more complicated for Sune. Because, really, let's be honest - does anyone ever REALLY choose to fall in love? How many times in our life have we developed feelings for someone when we wish we hadn't?

Certainly, there are the times where love grows slowly out of a friendship - a sort of slow building love. But even then... is it a conscious choice?

Sune already operates within this murky realm where mortals aren't necessarily making conscious decisions on who to fall in love with...

I mean, just picture a stereotypical Cupid character. It's flying around, it spots two people together, and thinks "Oh, they'd make a lovely couple." It pulls out it's little heart-shaped arrow, and shoots them with it.

From Sune's perspective, that's probably how she sees the world. It probably isn't that big of a deal for her Chosen to have powers to make people experience love. From her perspective, she'd just be "helping things along".

Of course, from our perspective she's tampering with free will. But I'm not entirely sure Sune sees it that way, or would necessarily even care.

The bigger issue, of course, is the whole using people to try and make them sacrifice themselves. However, was that Sune's intention or was that Joelle's intention? To me, that seems unclear. Sune might have informed Joelle of the need for a self-sacrifice, but that's quite different from telling her: "I'm giving you magic powers, go forth and find someone to kill themselves for you."

It's quite possible that Sune might have already known in advance that Joelle would need to sacrifice herself. ...but of course, I haven't read the book. So, I'm just spit balling some possibilities.
Go to Top of Page

Eltheron
Senior Scribe

740 Posts

Posted - 26 Apr 2014 :  15:09:57  Show Profile Send Eltheron a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick

I don't so much mind the shift in the perspective of Sune to include ALL aspects of love. As you pointed out, Eltheron, Tempus incorporates all aspects of war - not just the fighting-for-noble-reasons bits.

Bear in mind, I'm not at all against changing Sune to include all aspects of love for the canon Realms. In many ways, I think it gives her some depth. But if they do, then I think Sune's write-up and her alignment need an update to make her Chaotic Neutral just like Tempus.

In my own version of the Realms, I personally wouldn't and won't make this change, whether the canon Realms do or not. I prefer for Sune's overview and dogma to focus on love that is mutual. It can still be somewhat dark at times, but it leaves out the truly dark one-sided obsessions and such that I wouldn't really call love anyway. It's my personal choice for my home games.

Also, my deities are dramatically different in several other important respects. First, they are much more distant from the world. They send signs and portents, dreams and cryptic visions, but you'd never ever see an avatar. Second, my deities are independent from mortals and do not depend on them for worship for their existence. Third, my deities don't have the "I see everything through my portfolio" limitation. Fourth, I don't do "within the faith" schisms or heresies. Fifth, I don't have one single pantheon for all the nations and cultures of the world.

So on the one hand, my Realms gods are both more concrete yet also more of a cipher for mortals. Even a high priest may never learn everything there is to understand about their own deity.

quote:
To me, this potential adds additional complexity to Sune that didn't exist before - which is why I like it.

I don't mind added complexity or depth, really ever. But I do mind when pretty big, dramatic changes happen that change my decades-long perception. In this case, Sune asks for a blood sacrifice. There's no question about whether or not that's what she wants in the novel. So I'm left with trying to make some kind of sense of it.

quote:
Of course, this is also the problem with having deities directly involved in the stories at all. It lends too much credence to correct and incorrect interpretations. It's always better if they are more remote, and communicate only through cryptic dream visions or strange signs. That way we can have mortals who have honest disagreements, without having a deity show up and tell everyone exactly the way it should be - or just as bad... a deity who doesn't show up and inform people that they're wrong, when they could easily do so, simply to make things more mysterious.

I absolutely agree.

quote:
When it comes to the issue of Joelle and Arietta, not having read the book, I'm at a bit of a disadvantage. I'd have to say I'm more frustrated for real world reasons than for fiction reasons, namely in how a potential lesbian / bisexual relationship was treated. "Lesbian / bisexual woman uses magic to (perceivably) rape another woman..." ugh. Whenever someone is writing a character of a minority group, they should always begin by asking one important question: "Am I unintentionally playing into any common and offensive stereotypes?" It's like only writing female characters that are either cold-hearted bitches or sex-obsessed nymphomaniacs.

Yeah, this aspect of the novel was so forced and last minute, it really didn't make much sense.

quote:
Suggesting or equating gay sex with rape, suggesting that gay people use manipulative tactics (in this case magic) to convert / sway straight people, and a whole mess of other things are all suggested by this action. I'm sure it's unintentional on the authors part, but unfortunately that's what some people are going to read into it.

I agree, this really wasn't well thought-out. If I had to bet money, I imagine it probably went down like, "hey, throw in an LGBT scene so it makes WotC look progressive" which was probably intended as a part-positive and part-neutral presentation - because it's not made into a "huge deal" in the book.

But the execution utterly failed in relation to the rest of the plot, given how hugely manipulative and pragmatic Joelle is seen. From one page to the next, Joelle literally stops trying to manipulate Kleef with constant charm attempts because she determines that it'll never work because of Kleef's Chosen status. So she turns immediately to Arietta, and it works. With a ho-hum addendum that they had lesbisex off-page. Up to that point, Joelle and Arietta sort of had a basic friendship as traveling companions, but a giant deal was made out of her (and Kleef's) beliefs that nothing would ever happen because she was a noble and he was a commoner. Kleef is shown having romantic feelings for Arietta several times, and Arietta warms to him but there's a distance. But nothing at all between Arietta and Joelle is developed until that "oh they had lesbisex" moment.

Joelle and I think even Malik point out Arietta's hesitance and distance, sure that she does have feelings for Kleef. Arietta even determines that she will have to make Kleef a knight if they survive. So it all played out like Arietta was developing feelings for Kleef, and she was even figuring out a way to make it "above board" in terms of social class levels and such.

quote:
Also, if I'm not mistaken Arietta ends up with Kleef, the straight guy in the story at the end. Ugh. Ugh. Ugh. That's like twisting the knife, right there.

That's correct, Arietta does end up with Kleef. There's no sex or overt declarations of love between them at the end, but they do end up being closer emotionally. It was very clear that a future romance could happen between them, at least to my reading.

quote:
Moving back to the fiction, I am trying to imagine how things look from the perspective of Sune. I am not sure that I agree with you Eltheron, in that magically induced love is somehow not "real" love. Love is an emotion, just like fear.

I don't mind if people disagree with me. But I'm very unlikely to ever change my mind about magically-induced feelings ever being considered real. They might seem real or feel like they're real, but they're not. They're an overlay.

quote:
If a Banite wizard chains someone up and casts Fear on them repeatedly, does that somehow make that fear not real fear? I think from the perspective of the person who is chained up, under the effects of the magic, that they'd strongly disagree. Even after the magic is no longer in effect, if you ask them if they were terrified, they'd almost certainly tell you: Yes, absolutely.

If they're actually not afraid of the Banite, and only feel fear because of the magic spell, I think it would be pretty obvious to the person that it was all coming from the magic - and therefore not really how they truly felt.

Magic in the Realms can, of course, produce concrete effects. Conjured water, walls of stone, even imposed emotion are possible. But with imposed emotion, you are changing the very nature of that person's experience by making them feel what they would not normally feel without the magic.

It may be a fine point, but I think it's a critical one. When you change the nature of the individual's thoughts or emotions through magic, it's no longer the real them that is responding. Just as powerful drugs can cause hallucinations or bizarre beliefs, magical alteration of thought and emotion means you're no longer dealing with someone who is responsible for subsequent behavioral outcomes.

We do not say that someone in a severe bipolar manic episode is responsible for their choices and behaviors during the episode. Similarly, someone under the effects of a Rapture spell or even a regular Charm Person spell is not fully responsible for their choices and behaviors. Once you alter someone's beliefs, thoughts or emotions, such that they act in ways that isn't how the real, unaffected person would act, you're not dealing with the real them. Therefore, while it may feel or seem real, magically imposed emotion or thought is not real.

quote:
The big issue here is free will. Does Sune give two craps about the free will of mortals? I think from the perspective of most of the deities mortal free will is probably viewed as a pesky nuisance. It's fine so long as mortals are choosing to do what they want mortals to do, and it's problematic when mortals are choosing to do something counter to the deities wishes.

However, things are a bit more complicated for Sune. Because, really, let's be honest - does anyone ever REALLY choose to fall in love? How many times in our life have we developed feelings for someone when we wish we hadn't?

Certainly, there are the times where love grows slowly out of a friendship - a sort of slow building love. But even then... is it a conscious choice?

I think you're trying to equate free will (choice) with the reality of emotions. And they're really apples and oranges.

I'd be the first to agree that love is almost always unconscious and rarely a choice. We don't ever choose who, when, where, how, or why we fall in love.

Most emotions are not conscious choices. Emotions are behavioral reactions, which arise out of our personal history, situational context, and genetics. Emotions are real. But they're usually reactions not causes. What we DO with emotions, how we interpret them, is just as important as the fact that they exist. The fact that they arise out of the unconscious doesn't mean they aren't real, or that we don't have a choice in what to do with them once they've arisen.

When an outside emotion or thought is magically compelled in someone, it fundamentally changes the situation. In such a case, the forced emotions CAN become causal, in that they prompt behaviors or actions that would not have ever taken place without the imposed magic. With forced emotions, the person is not thinking or reacting with their right mind. They have, in fact, lost control of their behavior while under the influence of the magic.

quote:
From Sune's perspective, that's probably how she sees the world. It probably isn't that big of a deal for her Chosen to have powers to make people experience love. From her perspective, she'd just be "helping things along".

Of course, from our perspective she's tampering with free will. But I'm not entirely sure Sune sees it that way, or would necessarily even care.

I really dislike the notion that any deity would operate this way. In the Realms, the way gods work, I'd think Sune would derive power from real, organically developed love and would get next to nothing for magically imposed false love.

quote:
The bigger issue, of course, is the whole using people to try and make them sacrifice themselves. However, was that Sune's intention or was that Joelle's intention? To me, that seems unclear. Sune might have informed Joelle of the need for a self-sacrifice, but that's quite different from telling her: "I'm giving you magic powers, go forth and find someone to kill themselves for you."

It's quite possible that Sune might have already known in advance that Joelle would need to sacrifice herself. ...but of course, I haven't read the book. So, I'm just spit balling some possibilities.


That's entirely possible, of course. I think the exact wording was something along the lines of, "for Sune to prevail, the ritual requires a self-sacrifice made out of love." For the majority of the novel, Joelle pragmatically spends a huge amount of effort and time trying to make that happen for Sune. For three-fourths of the novel, Joelle fixates on charming Kleef so that he will "decide" to commit self-sacrifice for Joelle. Kleef isn't aware of her end-goal until after she gives up on him, but Malik knows about Joelle's true intentions pretty early on.

IMO, part of the problem was the incredibly weak plot. It was never explained why a blood sacrifice would help Sune or even why the orc goddess would fall in love with a primordial - or how enhancing the bond between them would "save the Realms" from Shar. None of it made much sense at all, really, least of all the importance of the blood sacrifice for Sune. Really, it was just another weird Denning moment where the gods were acting bizarrely and pretty stupidly for no apparent reason.



"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer

Edited by - Eltheron on 29 Apr 2014 14:58:18
Go to Top of Page

Zireael
Master of Realmslore

Poland
1190 Posts

Posted - 26 Apr 2014 :  19:05:37  Show Profile  Visit Zireael's Homepage Send Zireael a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos

I agree that love can be "beautiful". It can also be destructive, myopic and lead to behaviours that are intrinsically "not good". Let's be clear - there are lots of different types of 'love'. All-consuming, selective ("I love you for your body and nothing else ...") and most important of all ... unconditional. Sune will take any type of love and support any type of love. The behaviours that flow from it are irrelevant.

-- George Krashos



That's a very good point.

quote:
It's possible that she's cracked, and will be CN in 5e.


Given what happened in the novel, I think that's a real possibility.

SiNafay Vrinn, the daughter of Lloth, from Ched Nasad!

http://zireael07.wordpress.com/
Go to Top of Page

TBeholder
Great Reader

2376 Posts

Posted - 27 Apr 2014 :  01:47:16  Show Profile Send TBeholder a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh

In cases where a person is magically compelled to do something, I agree that it's the same as physically compelling them to do that thing.

But charm is (usually) a case where someone's emotional state is altered. They suddenly like you a lot more than they did before.
Ah, but this returns us to the question of fear spells. At which point the target be considered not acting on free will at all, etc?
Because if it's forced strong enough that the victim's own motivations are swept aside and simply don't matter anymore, it's but a compulsion on a higher level and thus slightly more indirect. As in, physically throw X into fire < make X walk into fire < give X an irresistible desire to take a walk into fire.
The main difference is the victim's experiences in process, and it matters only in case of such... divine robbery. Otherwise, the only practical difference is a longer chain - if someone is restrained, mind control can't do much, and giving compulsively strong friendly feelings to e.g. the sort of people who think organic life is just pointless suffering - or scaring someone who always reacts on fear with blind flailing of whatever happened to be in the hands - may lead to a little surprise.

People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch
Go to Top of Page

xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore

USA
1853 Posts

Posted - 27 Apr 2014 :  03:20:34  Show Profile  Visit xaeyruudh's Homepage Send xaeyruudh a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Whenever someone fails a save versus a mind-affecting spell, their will is not 100% their own. However, their degree of self-control is not necessarily 0% either.

Falling victim to a charm spell, regardless of its strength, does not necessarily mean that any particular action is forced. Fear might terrify someone to the point of running through a wall of fire spell, or across a bed of hot coals. Or it might make them collapse on the floor shrieking and sobbing, and wet themselves. Maybe it could even initiate an "out of body experience" which would look to observers like accepting fate in stoic dead-eyed silence. The only way to make sure they'll run through the fire is to use a more direct control spell, like dominate person. I'm sure for those who make a career out of causing fear, though, most of the fun must be in the fact that every mind is a fragile little snowflake... what will this one do?

You emphasized practical difference. If you're intent on killing someone, and you can be sure that you won't be caught/blamed for it or at least that you can't be punished for it, then there's no practical difference between any of the many options. Just pick the method that gives you the most pleasure.

Which is part of why there must be more to the story regarding Sune. If a death was all that was required, there would be no purpose in going to all this trouble.

Edited by - xaeyruudh on 27 Apr 2014 03:22:22
Go to Top of Page

Aldrick
Senior Scribe

909 Posts

Posted - 27 Apr 2014 :  03:23:20  Show Profile Send Aldrick a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Eltheron -

Honestly, I think I'd blame the problems on the book on whoever was the editor. I think a few minor tweaks could have fixed the situation.

- Establish early on that Joelle has feelings for Arietta, and that they are secretly returned.

- As the story progresses, feelings become revealed, Joelle and Arietta enter into a legitimate relationship.

- Joelle receives a cryptic dream vision from Sune. She interprets this dream vision to mean that Arietta will end up sacrificing herself to save her, in an act of true love, to stop whatever Shar is planning.

- Joelle is determined to save Arietta, and attempts to abuse her Chosen powers by attempting to charm Kleef. Her goal is to use Kleef to sacrifice himself in order to protect Arietta.

- Her attempt to charm Kleef with her Chosen powers fail, and instead they introduce complications into her romantic relationship and the larger story. When the time comes as foreseen in the vision, Arietta attempts to sacrifice herself for Joelle. Instead, Joelle manages to stop her and sacrifices herself instead. Thus, the sacrifice required for true love is met through Joelle rather than Arietta.

These minor changes would have fixed the main issues with the story arc. It makes Joelle's questionable actions with her Chosen abilities CLEARLY her own actions, not actions necessarily condoned by Sune. It also makes her motives for doing it understandable, even though obviously shady. And so long as the dream vision is done correctly, it keeps Sune's hands clean from everything that happens.

Though, from what I understand, these issues weren't the only issues the book faced. IMO, once again - all of this sounds more like problems that should have been handled by editors. Some of them were likely caused by things that needed to happen for the sake of the Sundering.

========

Yeah, I handle things a bit differently when it comes to the deities. Like you, I limit the deities interactions with mortals to strange visions, dreams, and signs that obviously manifest themselves. No avatars. No deities popping into the Realms to converse with mortals. Everyone knows with absolute certainty that the gods are real, and yet at the same time they are mysterious. They are both simultaneously close and yet distant.

When it comes to their write-ups in source books, I take it as the view of the majority of the faithful - the 'cult orthodoxy' if you will. In the case of Sune, the majority of her cult is focused on positive and good aspects of love. That wouldn't mean there aren't non-orthodox groups out there.

Because the deities don't show up, and don't spell things out: "This is what I feel. This is what I want. This is what I want you to do." Everything is much more cryptic... this leaves things open to interpretation by mortals. It's possible for two people to witness an identical vision, but walk away with slightly different (or in some cases totally different) interpretations.

Deities in my Realms are closely linked to their worshipers. The beliefs of mortals can literally reshape a deity, force deities to merge, cause the loss or gain of portfolios, and a whole host of other things. Deities in my Realms don't battle face-to-face themselves, they battle using mortals.

This achieves what I want: It puts the focus on the priests of a deity, and it gives me a great deal of flexibility when dealing with the gods. I'm not locked into a situation where I have to justify a deities actions, because I always have that critical degree of separation.

It makes it easy when I don't have to explain, for example, why Lathander won't simply tell his faithful that the Risen Sun Heretics are correct. After all, Lathander has never had trouble manifesting an avatar in the Realms in the past, and has never had trouble communicating other important things. Why be closed lipped about something so important as this?

I can simply shrug my shoulders, and point to the priests then leave it up to the characters as to whether or not they believe what they are saying.

========

Honestly, I don't have much more to add on the whole is it / was it rape situation. I feel a bit dirty just having to try and justify things from Sune's perspective.

From Sune's perspective? I don't think she gives a crap about free will. If she did she wouldn't have given her Chosen the power in the first place, regardless as to how she used it. Anyone who was charmed by the ability would have their free will stripped of them, forced to feel true love for Joelle through the power of Sune.

From my personal perspective? It was straight up rape. It was rape because free will was taken away from Arietta. Sex is only consensual when you can actually consent. You can't consent without free will. The situation was no different than if Joelle had slipped her a drug. However, the crime was on Joelle's part, and not Sune's. Joelle wasn't instructed by Sune to have sex with those she charmed with the power, that was Joelle's choice alone.

I don't agree that Arietta's feelings were somehow false. After all, Sune gave Joelle the ability to make people charmed by her powers to feel true love. As Sune is the goddess of love she has that power, if she can't force you to feel true love then no being can do it. In some ways, if you think about it, that makes it even more twisted.
Go to Top of Page

Eltheron
Senior Scribe

740 Posts

Posted - 27 Apr 2014 :  13:11:36  Show Profile Send Eltheron a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick

These minor changes would have fixed the main issues with the story arc. It makes Joelle's questionable actions with her Chosen abilities CLEARLY her own actions, not actions necessarily condoned by Sune. It also makes her motives for doing it understandable, even though obviously shady. And so long as the dream vision is done correctly, it keeps Sune's hands clean from everything that happens.

These changes might have helped, I agree. Personally, I have no objection to LGBTQ characters or themes, as long as they're done at least moderately well and they make some general sense in the overall context of the story. Even just having Arietta and Joelle show some sparks early on, then perhaps some playful banter, anything at all to show developing affection, would've made this subplot a lot better.

But frankly, if they're going to do something LGBTQ as a main plot element, they really should stop with the "are we or aren't we" vapid experimentation with women who "might or might not be" bisexual. Introduce two guys in a committed relationship and don't make it seem like it's just there because WotC wanted it there. Or have two women in a real, committed lesbian relationship. This just didn't have any reality or depth to it at all, and had the weird angle of total manipulation through a sexual encounter and magical charm. It was just gross, IMO - not because of the LGBTQ theme, but because of the overt manipulation.

quote:
Though, from what I understand, these issues weren't the only issues the book faced.

That's true. The main plot really didn't have any meat to it. How exactly does saving the relationship between an orc goddess and an earth primordial prevent Shar from destroying the world? Do we really have to have yet another story with the Netherese and Shar being stopped from some nefarious activity? Even if it was essential, why make them totally ineffective and switch to hordes of orcs appearing out of nowhere again and again? Bleah.

Did Kleef have to be the most boring fighter I've ever seen? Could they have had at least one single character that was likeable in the story? Even a likeable villain would've helped.

quote:
IMO, once again - all of this sounds more like problems that should have been handled by editors. Some of them were likely caused by things that needed to happen for the sake of the Sundering.

It really was just a laundry list. You could see items being checked off as the novel progressed, and that's never good.

quote:
Because the deities don't show up, and don't spell things out: "This is what I feel. This is what I want. This is what I want you to do." Everything is much more cryptic... this leaves things open to interpretation by mortals. It's possible for two people to witness an identical vision, but walk away with slightly different (or in some cases totally different) interpretations.

Too much focus of the gods as PCs, literally showing up, completely removes the importance of the story for mortals. It denies choice, makes us wonder what the gods want instead of what the mortals think they need to do. It removes the stakes from the novel, and weakens the story considerably. So I agree on many of your points there.

quote:
From my personal perspective? It was straight up rape. It was rape because free will was taken away from Arietta. Sex is only consensual when you can actually consent. You can't consent without free will. The situation was no different than if Joelle had slipped her a drug. However, the crime was on Joelle's part, and not Sune's. Joelle wasn't instructed by Sune to have sex with those she charmed with the power, that was Joelle's choice alone.

It would've been better if the crime had more clearly been presented as Joelle's decision alone. I totally agree there.

But the best situation would've been to never include any scene that could be readily perceived as rape. WotC doesn't need this, readers don't need this. Honestly, I don't think it was intended. An editor could've caught it, but they didn't, so now we're left with it and trying to figure out how to explain it. Even the smallest two or three clues that Arietta would've been open or interested in a lesbian relationship would have erased this issue entirely.

But as it is, we're left with a god-enhanced magical manipulation, followed by a lesbisex scene that had zero prior indications of Arietta even being remotely bisexual or thinking of Joelle in any other way than a slightly irritating traveling companion.

quote:
I don't agree that Arietta's feelings were somehow false. After all, Sune gave Joelle the ability to make people charmed by her powers to feel true love. As Sune is the goddess of love she has that power, if she can't force you to feel true love then no being can do it. In some ways, if you think about it, that makes it even more twisted.


Honestly, I think the whole "forcing emotions" angle should never be used. It just muddies everything and can make good characters look like horrible people (or even horrible gods).

Certainly, there are charm spells and emotion spells in the game. And good characters do use them. Even prior mechanics for regular Heartwarder priests of Sune have enhanced charm/love abilities when reaching a certain level and charisma score. There's certainly no denying any of that.

But when such things are taken out of the game and highly focused on in a novel, it gets readers to think about these extremely powerful abilities that pull things too far away from the simple fun of a tabletop game. There's a giant difference between an in-game Heartwarder using an empowered charm over a surly crowd (yay, you guys get to avoid a mob!) and a novel subplot that forces me to think about straight-up manipulation and how dirty that really feels. When I read a Realms novel, I really don't want to think about whether or not someone was raped by an ostensibly good character. You know? It's a little TOO real world, where horrific things happen on the news every day.


"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer
Go to Top of Page

Ateth Istarlin
Seeker

United Kingdom
80 Posts

Posted - 29 Apr 2014 :  06:18:27  Show Profile Send Ateth Istarlin a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I haven't read it yet - however, I find it hard to understand why this was allowed to feature in an FR book?!

The more I read about 4FR, the more depressed I am.
Politician - An elected official who tries to be all things to all people, while always looking out for his/her own interests first.
Go to Top of Page

Eltheron
Senior Scribe

740 Posts

Posted - 29 Apr 2014 :  15:07:52  Show Profile Send Eltheron a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Ateth Istarlin

I haven't read it yet - however, I find it hard to understand why this was allowed to feature in an FR book?!


It probably didn't occur to them.

The violence of rape (forcing someone against their will) was masked by Joelle's use of empowered Charm, so it would be harder for an editor to catch.


"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer
Go to Top of Page

The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore

1842 Posts

Posted - 03 May 2014 :  20:30:47  Show Profile Send The Arcanamach a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I haven't read through all of the replies yet but I want to say this much: Sune may or may not condone 'rape' in normal circumstances. The Sundering has all of the gods scrambling in fear of what is to come and, perhaps, Sune went beyond the pale on this one. Do remember she is a deity and is somewhat above mortal views/concerns. That said, I certainly don't view that scene (I did read the book) as a good act by Joelle or her goddess.

Oh, one more thing, it may have been Joelle's interpretation of what needed to be done as well. I don't recall anything in the book where Sune said, "Hey, Joelle, you need to charm that chic and get her to sacrifice herself for us mmmkay?" In fact, the ending kind of supports this.

Cheers.

I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one.
Go to Top of Page

The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore

1842 Posts

Posted - 03 May 2014 :  21:32:12  Show Profile Send The Arcanamach a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
When it comes to the issue of Joelle and Arietta, not having read the book, I'm at a bit of a disadvantage. I'd have to say I'm more frustrated for real world reasons than for fiction reasons, namely in how a potential lesbian / bisexual relationship was treated. "Lesbian / bisexual woman uses magic to (perceivably) rape another woman..." ugh. Whenever someone is writing a character of a minority group, they should always begin by asking one important question: "Am I unintentionally playing into any common and offensive stereotypes?" It's like only writing female characters that are either cold-hearted bitches or sex-obsessed nymphomaniacs.

Suggesting or equating gay sex with rape, suggesting that gay people use manipulative tactics (in this case magic) to convert / sway straight people, and a whole mess of other things are all suggested by this action. I'm sure it's unintentional on the authors part, but unfortunately that's what some people are going to read into it.

Also, if I'm not mistaken Arietta ends up with Kleef, the straight guy in the story at the end. Ugh. Ugh. Ugh. That's like twisting the knife, right there.

So, for me... I'm cringing at this aspect of things. A few minor tweaks could have fixed all of this...

I have to disagree with you here. Just because someone is a member of (any) minority group does NOT mean that said group cannot run the full gamut of good to evil behavior. What makes being gay/lesbian/bisexual so 'good' that one can't commit rape or murder? I can tell you that such folks have done these things.

Likewise, why should any author be limited to his/her writing for the sake of a given (minority) community? How is the author playing into a stereotype? I've never viewed lesbians as stereoypically being rapists. I've never known anyone to take such a view. Sure, I've known folks who were very conservative in their beliefs regarding the subject, but none of them in my 40+ years ever said that gay folks were, by definition, prone to committing rape...but that doesn't mean such individuals aren't capable of it either (because there are cases where this has happened).

Anyway, I don't mean to be confrontational about it. I just disagree that the author should approach the issue from a 'politically correct' standpoint (for lack of a better way of putting it). Denning is free to express his art (and I think writing is an art form) as he sees fit, even if some of us don't like it.

I have several problems with the novel, tbh, but I would never accuse Denning of being callous in his handling of the subject. If that's the case, then George R.R. Martin should be shot, today.

I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one.
Go to Top of Page

The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore

1842 Posts

Posted - 03 May 2014 :  22:01:18  Show Profile Send The Arcanamach a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
- Establish early on that Joelle has feelings for Arietta, and that they are secretly returned.

- As the story progresses, feelings become revealed, Joelle and Arietta enter into a legitimate relationship.

- Joelle receives a cryptic dream vision from Sune. She interprets this dream vision to mean that Arietta will end up sacrificing herself to save her, in an act of true love, to stop whatever Shar is planning.

- Joelle is determined to save Arietta, and attempts to abuse her Chosen powers by attempting to charm Kleef. Her goal is to use Kleef to sacrifice himself in order to protect Arietta.

- Her attempt to charm Kleef with her Chosen powers fail, and instead they introduce complications into her romantic relationship and the larger story. When the time comes as foreseen in the vision, Arietta attempts to sacrifice herself for Joelle. Instead, Joelle manages to stop her and sacrifices herself instead. Thus, the sacrifice required for true love is met through Joelle rather than Arietta.

Heh, I think you just changed how this whole novel 'occurred' in my Realms (if I ever use any of this Sundering nonsense...I'm still firmly entrenched in pre-Spellplague times).

I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one.
Go to Top of Page

hashimashadoo
Master of Realmslore

United Kingdom
1150 Posts

Posted - 04 May 2014 :  19:14:58  Show Profile  Visit hashimashadoo's Homepage Send hashimashadoo a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach

I've never viewed lesbians as stereoypically being rapists. I've never known anyone to take such a view.


Actually, it was a very common stereotype for all gay people up until the early 80s. I've seen american infomercials from the 70s that would make a person with modern ideals very upset.

When life turns it's back on you...sneak attack for extra damage.

Head admin of the FR wiki:

https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/

Edited by - hashimashadoo on 04 May 2014 19:16:08
Go to Top of Page

Aldrick
Senior Scribe

909 Posts

Posted - 05 May 2014 :  10:39:55  Show Profile Send Aldrick a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach

I have to disagree with you here. Just because someone is a member of (any) minority group does NOT mean that said group cannot run the full gamut of good to evil behavior. What makes being gay/lesbian/bisexual so 'good' that one can't commit rape or murder? I can tell you that such folks have done these things.


That's not the point I was making at all. The point I was making is that it plays directly into a negative and (sadly still common in some parts) stereotype of gay people in general. Namely, that gay people convert others to be gay usually through rape or molestation.

It's a bit like writing a single black character into a story, making him a member of a criminal gang, giving him a giant afro, and having every line of dialog he speaks be in ebonics. Alternatively, it's like a bad Lifetime Movie where every male in the movie is an abuser of women whether physical, sexual, or emotional. You can't really say such characters aren't playing into negative stereotypes. Do such people exist in the real world? Yes, of course, but that's not the point.

Can people write books with such characters? Of course they can. Yet, those that do it shouldn't expect those reading the story not to cringe - especially the people of the group being stereotyped. If people are cringing when they are reading your story, then you've effectively thrown them out of the story.

People may cringe when they read George R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire, but they're cringing for entirely different reasons. In fact, he's a good example of an author who handles these things well. In his world women are absolutely not the equal of men. Yet, his book is filled with women who run the entire spectrum, and many of his most beloved characters are women. Many women also read and enjoy his stories. Why? Because he writes women well, and he doesn't try to limit them to stereotypes.

Just imagine how different his books would be if the only major and noticeable female characters in the story were Sansa the doormat and Cersei the insane psycho-bitch. Those are typical stereotypes of women. However, it isn't problematic in the story because there are other females showing diversity.

When you have a single character of a large and diverse group of people in a story it's stupid to stereotype them to hell and back. It ends up coming off exactly as if aSoIF had only Sansa and Cersei as female characters in the story. Virtually every woman (and more than a few men) who would read the book would cringe, and not in the way GRRM wants them to, either.

I don't think it was the intention of Denning to portray things the way he did - I don't think he realized how what he wrote would be interpreted by others who read the book. Just as I don't think he intended it to look like Joelle was raping Arietta, but that's how it ended up appearing to a lot of people who read the book. This means, at least to me, the fault rests with the editors. Someone should have caught it, and have asked: "Hey, is this what you're going for... because that's what it reads like to me." Denning probably would have responded with dismay, and would have rewritten some things to be more accurate to what he intended.

Sometimes when you're writing stuff things come off in ways that you don't intend. I think this definitely qualifies.

Go to Top of Page

The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore

1842 Posts

Posted - 05 May 2014 :  12:21:00  Show Profile Send The Arcanamach a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I guess I just don't read stereotypes into the stories I read. When I consider characters and real world people I have to realize that some folks actually DO fit stereotypes...both in fiction and real life as well as good and bad stereotypes. So, when I read something, I don't really 'see' the stereotype, just the character as he/she is.

Now that you've gone into more detail I completely see your point. I can see how some might be put off by it, though IMO folks shouldn't be UNLESS an author has a habit of it or is known to be a very prejudiced.

Anyway I don't want to derail the OP. Thanks for the clarification.

I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one.
Go to Top of Page

Zireael
Master of Realmslore

Poland
1190 Posts

Posted - 06 May 2014 :  14:52:12  Show Profile  Visit Zireael's Homepage Send Zireael a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick

Eltheron -

Honestly, I think I'd blame the problems on the book on whoever was the editor. I think a few minor tweaks could have fixed the situation.

- Establish early on that Joelle has feelings for Arietta, and that they are secretly returned.

- As the story progresses, feelings become revealed, Joelle and Arietta enter into a legitimate relationship.

- Joelle receives a cryptic dream vision from Sune. She interprets this dream vision to mean that Arietta will end up sacrificing herself to save her, in an act of true love, to stop whatever Shar is planning.

- Joelle is determined to save Arietta, and attempts to abuse her Chosen powers by attempting to charm Kleef. Her goal is to use Kleef to sacrifice himself in order to protect Arietta.

- Her attempt to charm Kleef with her Chosen powers fail, and instead they introduce complications into her romantic relationship and the larger story. When the time comes as foreseen in the vision, Arietta attempts to sacrifice herself for Joelle. Instead, Joelle manages to stop her and sacrifices herself instead. Thus, the sacrifice required for true love is met through Joelle rather than Arietta.




These are very good points.

I missed the fact about playing into stereotypes, but yeah, reminds me of a converstation that went: "hey, you're disabled, so you might be interested in the fact that novel X has a disabled character Y". The fact that it plays the disabled=helpless stereotype nothwithstanding. Argh!

SiNafay Vrinn, the daughter of Lloth, from Ched Nasad!

http://zireael07.wordpress.com/
Go to Top of Page

Mirtek
Senior Scribe

595 Posts

Posted - 12 May 2014 :  21:15:14  Show Profile Send Mirtek a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder

IMO, the root of problems here are a few of arbitrary notions accepted as axioms, and "effect of Charm is not 'real' love" is the key one.
To me, it looks bizarre - it's the same as saying that "effect of Spooks is not 'real' fear". It very much is, that's the whole point.
Indeed. That's like saying Cupid's arrows are simply syringes for delivering love drugs

If it's directly inspired by the lady of love herself, how much more love could it possibly be?

Edited by - Mirtek on 12 May 2014 21:20:14
Go to Top of Page

Eltheron
Senior Scribe

740 Posts

Posted - 13 May 2014 :  06:19:42  Show Profile Send Eltheron a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Mirtek

quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder

IMO, the root of problems here are a few of arbitrary notions accepted as axioms, and "effect of Charm is not 'real' love" is the key one.
To me, it looks bizarre - it's the same as saying that "effect of Spooks is not 'real' fear". It very much is, that's the whole point.
Indeed. That's like saying Cupid's arrows are simply syringes for delivering love drugs

If it's directly inspired by the lady of love herself, how much more love could it possibly be?


You're missing the bigger picture, which has been present in fantasy literature ever since it was invented.

Name one story from fantasy literature involving magic, godly gifts or myths where the gods simply grant mortals anything. How often does that work out well? Rarely. Often, the result is terrible.

Magic love potions are always, ultimately, seen as false and hollow. They give the appearance, but not the reality of love, usually because the "love" is more akin to sexual/passion obsession and only works on one person.

Cupid's arrows are usually tragic, leading to one-sided overwhelming desire rather than actual love. I can't recall any story of Cupid from myth where his arrows worked out well for those he shot.

Conversely, in most fantasy literature, real, true love can actually break magical spells and curses.

It really boils down to whether or not something as meaningful as love can be truly delivered by a magic spell - and if it's one-sided passion, there's no ultimate sense of honor, truth, or realness to it. It's ultimately hollow, manipulative and viewed in a very negative light in most fantasy stories.

Consider a victory brought about by a god of War who just shows up and wipes out your enemies for you. Since it wasn't hard-won, is it really a victory? Did you actually accomplish anything, or is it hollow? Why would Ares or Tyr or Tempus honor a "warrior" who hadn't actually won any battles for himself?

Sune might help push or arrange circumstances for love to take root and develop. She might break through someone's hesitance by slipping them a passion-inducing potion or spell. But does she force love into a situation where no thought of it even exists? Shouldn't Sune, because of her very nature, value real love over any magical fakery, particularly if it's one-sided?


"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer

Edited by - Eltheron on 13 May 2014 16:20:07
Go to Top of Page

Razz
Senior Scribe

USA
749 Posts

Posted - 19 May 2014 :  02:02:05  Show Profile Send Razz a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The gods are the gods. They act within their portfolios in a very gray area.

It's the BELIEVERS that put the gods in a box, to better understand them. Just because Sune is listed as Chaotic Good, and the majority of her followers gravitate in that direction, does not mean Sune is bound to be Chaotic Good in all her endeavors and motivations.

Let's not forget that the 3.5 book, "Power of Faerun" written by Ed Greenwood himself, put in a section about "Heretics of the Faith." Now, let's be clear, a heretic is simply someone that does not adhere with the majority, it does not mean they are wrong in what they believe and do. It simply means they are a small minority on the subject.

They wrote a feat called "Heretic of the Faith". What did it do? It allowed you to actually choose almost any alignment (I believe two steps instead of one step rule) and adhere to a different set of beliefs and rulings concerning your deity and STILL receive divine power. You lose divine power if you break your tenets consistently, but these people put a whole new spin on a deity's portfolio and continue to be blessed with divine might.

The example given was a sect of Ilmatarans who believe running around bringing pain and suffering to others and themselves will actually cause the world to be free from such vices. Or some such nonsense. (It may sound like Loviatar, but the majority of her followers do not believe this, they simply enjoy pain and almost always do not force pain on others, they do it to those willing to take it despite their evil nature).

In another novel, this one by R.A. Salvatore, "Road to the Patriarch", there was a high ranking priest of Selune raping poverty-stricken Calishite women in Calimshan over the years, bastardizing many children on top of other vices. This priest must have had divine power still or such acts would not be condoned for long. Another heretic, clearly, and granted power by Selune still. (Salvatore never got into detail why a Selunite priest was able to get away with this, he never was a game rules abiding author which always drove me nuts).

So, yes, I do not find what Sune did to be out of the ordinary. At least for her. Her followers would, surely, come to a crisis of faith if they knew.

Edited by - Razz on 19 May 2014 02:02:46
Go to Top of Page

ksu_bond
Learned Scribe

New Zealand
214 Posts

Posted - 19 May 2014 :  02:45:33  Show Profile Send ksu_bond a Private Message  Reply with Quote
She's the goddess of love...not the goddess of true love, or unrequited love, or mutual love, or etc. She is the Goddess of LOVE, which I take to mean love in it generic all inclusive form:

"Love is a variety of different feelings, states, and attitudes that ranges from interpersonal affection ("I love my mother") to pleasure ("I loved that meal"). It can refer to an emotion of a strong attraction and personal attachment. It can also be a virtue representing human kindness, compassion, and affection—"the unselfish loyal and benevolent concern for the good of another". It may also describe compassionate and affectionate actions towards other humans, one's self or animals. Classically there are four forms of love: kinship or familiarity (in Greek, storge), friendship (philia), sexual and/or romantic desire (eros), and self-emptying or divine love (agape)."

The simple fact is that Sune represents ALL love, whether is is Good or Evil, Chaotic or Lawful...this would include love potions, charm spells, narcisists, incestuous love, etc., as well as the more romantic ideals of "TRUE" love...

As far a her alignment that is a legitimate debate, but I'd wager that her actions are more often (even if it is just 50.00000000000000000000000000001%) than not Good...especially given that her and her church are often dressed up in the romantic ideal of "True" love...and while this could simply be window dressing to cover up the numerous dark aspects of love, it is more than likely done for the same reason that the Arthurian legends and books on chivalry were written, to give the people hope of that TRUE love does exist and that they just might find it...

Just my 2 coppers...
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2024 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000