| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| lycurgus33 |
Posted - 09 Oct 2007 : 22:07:51
I've noticed this playing through BG1 and 2 and ToB, and now Neverwinter Nights, and also some of the novels, that there's this trend to bash Helm, or his clerics--always making them the victims of conspiracies or ill fortune and the like. It's pretty brutal.
Why pick on Helm? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 23 Oct 2007 : 02:18:04
Actually, I'm annoyed by that. Do people actually think that Bane's Churches call out and say "Worship Bane and the cause of EVIL!" I mean, I always assumed that Bane's church was authoritarian, cruel, and power hungry but that he portrayed himself as a benign figure anyway.
Cyric certainly does it in Prince of Lies.
For me, I always assumed that if you wanted horrible parodies of real world religious hypocrisy, you'd use the Church of Cyric and if you wanted real world analogies of fanaticism and zealotry you'd use Bane.
But yes, Helm is a frequent god of our Good Aligned PCs. Oddly, no one ever takes Tyr.
|
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 23 Oct 2007 : 02:07:12
Its all in the presentation. You could do something similar with some of Helm's priests, but since we never really saw the "opposition" or what amounts to the "standard" Helmites, the impression is that what we are seeing is indicative of Helm's entire faith.
Helm actually has a good number of paladins serving him, and his paladin order, the Vigilant Eyes of the Deity, are specifically concerned about what the Maztican priests are doing to the faith, but this only gets mentioned in Helm's write up in Faiths and Avatars, Faiths and Pantheons, or in Power of Faerun. It would have been nice to see reflected in the novels. Still, kudos to Lisa Smedmen for portraying the Vilhon Reach Helmites and forces working for the general welfare. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 23 Oct 2007 : 01:57:57
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
Yes, bravo.
Frankly, if someone wanted a self-righteous and evil god that tortured/converted by the sword/etc.
WHY NOT USE BANE?!
Probably because people (and I'm not saying I agree with them using Helm for this) who are trying to make a point about the dark side of authoritarianism like the idea of a supposedly goodly religion that ends up doing bad things. Bane has no pretentions of being a benign deity, so he wouldn't work for that purpose. |
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 23 Oct 2007 : 01:12:55
Yes, bravo.
Frankly, if someone wanted a self-righteous and evil god that tortured/converted by the sword/etc.
WHY NOT USE BANE?!
|
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 23 Oct 2007 : 01:06:07
quote:
There is a lot of room between direct intervention of gods and the Eberron model.
I totally agree. Great post.
|
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 23:57:29
Okay, obviously what happens in the books is canon, so if it happens, it happens, however, we have also over the years, various times, had Ed tell us that we can't fully know exactly what is happening with the gods, and at best we get snapshots and general impressions which may be incomplete. What this means is that any scene with gods talking to gods and gods plotting and the like is most likely "generally" what happened, but not the full story. The exception would be during the Avatar trilogy, because the gods were mortal, and weren't operating on several planes and various aspects.
To illustrate this, if all of the scenes involving the gods and only the gods are to be taken as literally as scenes where gods interact with mortals, then literally Eilistraee and Lolth are both larger than the planes they inhabit, they sit straddling the Great Tree, and there is a Sava Board as large as some planes sitting there as well. Which means that travelers in the planes, should, depending on where they travel, run into giant drow thighs blocking their paths from various portals and the like.
This would also imply that none of the mortal followers of Eilistree and Lolth really have free will, because the framing device of those stories implies that its the moves each goddess makes that causes events to happen in the novel. This of course also goes against Ed's comment that there is no Fate in the Realms, and that the gods can only guide a mortal's path, not predeterme it.
As far as the Earthmother and Chauntea, I can easily see this (even though I know that this situation arose from placing the Moonshaes into the Realms when they weren't originally designed to be there). The Earthmother was a particularly powerful "avatar" of Chauntea, one that Chauntea wasn't sure if she should "realign" into herself. I've had conversations in my head before about whether I should or shouldn't do something, and vacillated between those positions for a while before. For a goddess I can imagine that this can be even more dramatic. As Wooly said, eventually I think Chauntea may have just decided that it was good to leaver her Earthmother aspect alone for the good of the Moonshaes, even after she had started to "reverse" the process of leaving it in place and "letting it die."
Helm's actual involvement in the Druidhome Trilogy was kind of minimal, and really doesn't make much sense, given that Talos is one of his traditional foes. I like Douglas Niles and have enjoyed his work, but when asked about the changes to continuity he created in the Rise of Solomnia Dragonlance novels, he said that he doesn't worry about canon when it comes to telling the story he wants to tell. Beyond being a problematic mindset for a shared world setting, it also indicates to me that even though the events of the novels are "canon," knowing this makes it a lot easier to see anything that Helm might have done in these books as aberrations to his normal personality rather than his baseline, given the conflicts with other sources about Helm.
So, long story short, everything the novels say happened, happened, but there is a lot more to what is going on when it comes to scenes involving the gods than we ever find out about.
The idea that either the gods are constantly meddling and directly conflicting with each other, or they are like "Eberron" isn't really accurate. Its too extremes, and the Realms is actually somewhere in the middle, at least as I see it. We can know the "gist" of what the gods do, what they are about, and what they espouse, but we never see the "whole picture" and the gods don't act directly (either themselves or through avatars) most of the time, but they do hint, poke, prod, and sometimes club their followers over the head when they want them to do something. The more directly one god acts, the more directly other gods can act, and the more likely Faerun is to getting torn up. And if that becomes a massive possibility, then Ao gets involved, and nobody wants that.
Eberron's model is that the gods may not really exist, or they may, and while followers think they know things about them, no one has proof, and heretics can easily be hiding in the church because all of the power of divine casters comes directly from belief. In the Realms, all divine power comes from the divine, which, on top of other historical facts, proves that the divine does exist. Heretics are sponsored by someone, often an enemy of the core faith, but no person powers their own divine spells. There is a lot of room between direct intervention of gods and the Eberron model.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 21:30:15
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Faiths & Avatars explains that the Earthmother is a more primitive aspect, a portion of her essence that is dedicated to directly overseeing the Moonshaes.
I'm thinking that the reason for the competition was that the portion of her that was overseeing the Moonshaes had been too long separated, and was something of an independent agent. Because of this, Chauntea couldn't simply reabsorb it. She had to get the worshippers away to weaken the aspect, before she could reabsorb it.
Aye, but originally the Earthmother was a totally separate deity from Chauntea, until TSR retcon'd the six novels. :) Otherwise, some of the story in the novels makes no sense because the Earthmother dies and Chauntea takes her place until the Earthmother returns and kicks out Chauntea from the druids that switched to Chauntea's worship.
Well, if you take my idea out a bit further, it could still work: the Earthmother was originally an semi-independent aspect, but over time and with plenty of worship, she wound up becoming a fully indepedent entity in her own right. |
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 20:38:33
Except, an Earthmother makes no sense setting wise.
Because Chauntea is the Earth.
|
| Kuje |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 20:16:44
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Faiths & Avatars explains that the Earthmother is a more primitive aspect, a portion of her essence that is dedicated to directly overseeing the Moonshaes.
I'm thinking that the reason for the competition was that the portion of her that was overseeing the Moonshaes had been too long separated, and was something of an independent agent. Because of this, Chauntea couldn't simply reabsorb it. She had to get the worshippers away to weaken the aspect, before she could reabsorb it.
Aye, but originally the Earthmother was a totally separate deity from Chauntea, until TSR retcon'd the six novels. :) Otherwise, some of the story in the novels makes no sense because the Earthmother dies and Chauntea takes her place until the Earthmother returns and kicks out Chauntea from the druids that switched to Chauntea's worship. |
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 20:00:52
That's actually an important element of my own games and I thought it wasn't that much of a problem. It's strictly an issue of religion as opposed to an argument amongst the gods.
Helm and Talos wanted to convert the Moonshaes faithful from Chaunteaism.
Chauntea's faithful from Faerun wanted to convert the Druids to a more benevolent seeming version of her, despite the fact they worshiped the same God.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 19:27:51
Faiths & Avatars explains that the Earthmother is a more primitive aspect, a portion of her essence that is dedicated to directly overseeing the Moonshaes.
I'm thinking that the reason for the competition was that the portion of her that was overseeing the Moonshaes had been too long separated, and was something of an independent agent. Because of this, Chauntea couldn't simply reabsorb it. She had to get the worshippers away to weaken the aspect, before she could reabsorb it.
|
| Kuje |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 19:19:13
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
Also, Helm allies himself with Talos in The Druid Queen. They try to overthrow the Earthmother as the exclusive deity of the Moonshaes. I do not remember, but did they retcon the Earthmother into an aspect of Chauntea in 3e?
I believe they did.
Indeed she is a aspect of Chauntea but the confusion actually started before 3/3.5e lore because some of the 2e sourcebooks is where this aspect stuff started. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 19:14:39
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
So, now that the novels are all canon, that screws with my head. Can a deity be a rival with an aspect of itself. It seems as if the novels are now both canon and non-canon. I think I will stop. My head is beginning to hurt.
'
That's life in the world of FR canon, truly. |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 19:09:41
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
Also, Helm allies himself with Talos in The Druid Queen. They try to overthrow the Earthmother as the exclusive deity of the Moonshaes. I do not remember, but did they retcon the Earthmother into an aspect of Chauntea in 3e?
I believe they did.
So, now that the novels are all canon, that screws with my head. Can a deity be a rival with an aspect of itself. It seems as if the novels are now both canon and non-canon. I think I will stop. My head is beginning to hurt. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 18:58:20
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
Also, Helm allies himself with Talos in The Druid Queen. They try to overthrow the Earthmother as the exclusive deity of the Moonshaes. I do not remember, but did they retcon the Earthmother into an aspect of Chauntea in 3e?
I believe they did. |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 18:56:18
Also, Helm allies himself with Talos in The Druid Queen. They try to overthrow the Earthmother as the exclusive deity of the Moonshaes. I do not remember, but did they retcon the Earthmother into an aspect of Chauntea in 3e? If so, that is weird considering that they are rivals for the allegiance of the Moonshaes in the Druid Home Trilogy. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 18:51:59
quote:
Originally posted by aravine
Anyway, yes I do beleive they negitivly portray Helm. In BG2they have his clerics, mirroring him,presumably, act kind of snobbish. besides this, they say Helm sees all, but he obviosly can't see the theat of the beholder.
Well, they DO see that threat, because for all PCs except good or evil priests (IIRC), the clerics of Helm are the ones who approach the PC and ask him/her to do something about that cult.
Again, I don't think the BG games had some type of agenda to make Helm look bad, whereas other games/novels/plot developments might. The BG games came off as pretty balanced in that regard. |
| Aravine |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 18:07:02
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Enough. We have strayed far enough from the topic. 
Sorry, Wooly. Anyway, yes I do beleive they negitivly portray Helm. In BG2they have his clerics, mirroring him,presumably, act kind of snobbish. besides this, they say Helm sees all, but he obviosly can't see the theat of the beholder. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 18:03:10
Enough. We have strayed far enough from the topic. |
| Aravine |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 17:41:02
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
I think that if you can't enjoy a type of story, it's a loss. I'd say the same if you didn't like action movies or its my loss I hate romance films.
But whatever.
Guys, take it easy. this is a friendly discussion, and IMO if you want to keep disagreeing you can do it over PM's |
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 17:29:53
I think that if you can't enjoy a type of story, it's a loss. I'd say the same if you didn't like action movies or its my loss I hate romance films.
But whatever.
|
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 16:48:16
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
I don't see how it's not. Then again, I suppose some people prefer the Eberron model for deities. I guess it's not so problematic to view them as distant and remote creatures untied to the setting. But, for me, I think that players need to be able to thwart divine plans if there's interventionalist gods.
We already disagree on the nature of deities in the FR--although, I don't recall saying I prefered an "Eberron" model, or that I see them as untied to the setting! That is nonsense. We also disagree on this issue. That's all there is to it.
It's not a "loss" for me. To insist that it is (in sincerity) comes off as condescending. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 16:46:52
quote:
Originally posted by Kajehase
On the surface at least
(And there was a priestess of Sune who made a brief appearance as healer/magic shop in Hordes of the Underdark.)
Well, that was an expansion. My comments apply more to the original NWN1 campaign (the worst one, in my opinion). |
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 14:53:42
quote:
Don't be sorry, because it's not a loss.
I don't see how it's not. Then again, I suppose some people prefer the Eberron model for deities. I guess it's not so problematic to view them as distant and remote creatures untied to the setting. But, for me, I think that players need to be able to thwart divine plans if there's interventionalist gods.
quote:
The religion NWN1 *AND* NWN2 were obsessed with (surprising, since they were both made by different developers) was Tyr's religion. NWN1 especially. If you played the NWN1 OC and knew nothing else about the Realms, you might come out thinking most people worshipped Tyr and he was the only god of any importance in the setting.
I may have to play these games sometime.
|
| Kajehase |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 14:44:43
On the surface at least
(And there was a priestess of Sune who made a brief appearance as healer/magic shop in Hordes of the Underdark.) |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 14:28:56
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
And, (spoilers for NWN original campaign):
And the real Helmites were killed and replaced by the crazy cultists, so actually none of the "Helmites" were "real" Helmites in that story either.
Right.
The religion NWN1 *AND* NWN2 were obsessed with (surprising, since they were both made by different developers) was Tyr's religion. NWN1 especially. If you played the NWN1 OC and knew nothing else about the Realms, you might come out thinking most people worshipped Tyr and he was the only god of any importance in the setting. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 14:26:46
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
Yep.
Sorry for you both.
Don't be sorry, because it's not a loss. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 12:18:56
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by lycurgus33
*spoilers*
In BG1 we have a devotee of Helm given a cursed sword and thus goes crazy and wipes out his kin.
But overall I think someone (or maybe a lot of people) who developed the BG series really liked Helm. His followers and temples are pretty common in those games (and they aren't portrayed more negatively than positively), and Watcher's Keep (in ToB) is all about Helm.
quote:
In NWN1 Helm's Hold gets wiped out, and Thick as Moss gets hung, and her paladin lover goes crazy...
Fenthick Moss and Aribeth were Tyrrans.
And, (spoilers for NWN original campaign):
And the real Helmites were killed and replaced by the crazy cultists, so actually none of the "Helmites" were "real" Helmites in that story either. |
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 05:55:49
Yep.
Sorry for you both.
|
| Mkhaiwati |
Posted - 22 Oct 2007 : 04:20:46
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
That's why you need to have plots where the PCs directly screw with a god.
No, I can't speak for everyone but *I* certainly don't need plots like that.
I'm sorry for your loss.
my loss too. I agree with Rinonalyrna. |
|
|
