| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| khorne |
Posted - 31 Jan 2014 : 17:41:24
One of the things 4th edition did to piss me off was claim that a bunch of non-human deities weren't actually independent powers, but instead aspects of human gods. This seemed appallingly humanocentric to me. Does anyone know if 5th edition will retcon that particular eyesore? |
| 26 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 04 Feb 2014 : 03:47:05
quote:
Originally posted by VexHaus
Something else worth noting is that when two separate cultures with their own pantheons begin intermingling and the pantheons begin merging, their respective deities with overlapping portfolios supposedly come to blows with the loser either becoming subservient to the victor (e.g. Tempus vs. Garagos) or being outright destroyed (e.g. Talona vs. Kiputytto).
But say in the hypothetical future humans begin absorbing elven culture to the point that the Faerūnian pantheon and the Seldarine end up merging. If, say, Sune and Hanali Celanil turned out to really be two different racial aspects of the same divine being, would they still come into direct competition or would they just kinda chill together as equals like interracial twins and share worshipers?
As of 4e, Sune and Hanali were revealed to be different racial aspects of each other. |
| sfdragon |
Posted - 04 Feb 2014 : 03:34:24
it has always been lead to that there may not be as many gods in Faerun that is believed. Which can incline that there are less or there are more.
Amuanator who is Lathander who is also Atar........
it could also be Amuanator who is also Lathander and his right hand woman Atar( who acts in the Sunlord's name).
|
| Ayrik |
Posted - 03 Feb 2014 : 23:40:36
Those among us who like Gruumsh *and* Talos, as distinct entities, not as a single entity with two names and faces, find this new logic no better than the old new logic (of 4E) which contrived to humanize all deities of the Realms.
Gruumsh is the creator and symbolic archetype of orcs. Much as Corellon is for the elves. Talos is cool enough, but really is just the human anthropomorphism of storms, furies, and destruction.
There may be overlap in these divine identities, but it is childishly simplistic to pretend thats because many deities are just different names for fewer deities.
Faerūns mythology is poorer each time a god is culled. Twice as much when lost gods are deliberately overwritten in compliance with newer religions. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 02 Feb 2014 : 02:55:56
quote:
That being said, I do wonder about a problem this presents. There are dozens of deities in the Forgotten Realms setting with definite concrete and historical origin stories, e.g. interloper deities like the Seldarine, the Mulhorandi Pantheon, and Tyr, or mortals who ascended to divine status like Torm. How do you account for these deities having been different aspects of others native to Faerūn? For example, if Gruumsh didn't exist in Faerūn prior to the Orcgate Wars, then how could he and Talos have been the same being all along? It doesn't seem to make much sense to me without a lot of unnecessary complicated theological backtracking.
Regarding this. We could simply say that Gruumsh was Talos' name on the orc homeworld. When Gruumsh was summoned to the Realms we simply ended up with two different aspects in one world. |
| Mapolq |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 19:32:41
I don't like the "make up your info" approach either. What I'm hoping we'll get is we'll have info on both Selūne and Sehanine (or rather their churches, ethos, followers, etc.). Lots of it will be new info, and maybe it will be cool enough to make me buy products. We might hear the story of Sehanine coming from Faerie or wherever the Seldarine came from these days, we may hear the myth of creation involving Selūne, the only thing we won't hear is someone stating "Selūne and Sehanine are the same deity" or "Selūne and Sehanine are not the same deity" (and we won't hear "so-and-so deity is dead" either). At least not in sourcebook fashion - someone might state that in-world, and they might be right or wrong. |
| Foxhelm |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 19:28:49
Another option:
It could be the Spellplague could have damaged some of these gods and to survive in a fashion they fused with another deity. Like Zandilar the Dancer and Sharess. Then the clergy could have come up with, they have always been this way to try and avoid schisms in the faith. Whether this story worked or not.... |
| Irennan |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 17:57:44
quote:
Originally posted by Mapolq
I think - and let me stress the words I think - the approach will be "the gods are mysterious, maybe Selūne is Sehanine, maybe she isn't, and we won't tell you". Which is not as good as what we had, in my opinion, but about the best we could hope to get after the (imo again) setting miscarriage of 4e.
I guess they will go that route. But then, I wonder why the hell someone who owns old material would buy the new stuff. I mean, if they take the ''lulz, make up your own info'' approach, they are not providing anything to old customers, as it has always been possible to make up lore w/o any problem.
quote:
I think you are missing the bigger picture. Also look at Hinduism where deities are all aspects of each other. There are other concepts of divinity than them being like people. Deities shouldn't just be like people they are vast mysterious entities that see many things, do many things, and are many things all at once. Do you not think deities should have multiple aspects/faces?
Comparing FR deities with RW ones is not a good idea IMO. The former are real and can directly interact with you, the latter can't and can be w/e you want. Also whether it is fitting for a deity to be multiple things or not depends on the particular case. If a god is involved in some particular event or quest that contributes to defining it/her/him, then he shouldn't be the same as another deity. It makes little sense and makes things shallow. Besides some of them are the result of mortal emotions and ideas, so they should represent this and have the appropriate mortal characteristics.
At this point I could say: Why are there so many deities? At the end of the day all the things divine beings represent are aspects of one reality, so all of them should be faces of a single entity who takes multiple identities to appeal to the different kinds of worshippers and their interests. Nothing fits the ''vast and mysterious entity'' concept more than this... |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 17:17:13
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by Mapolq
I think - and let me stress the words I think - the approach will be "the gods are mysterious, maybe Selūne is Sehanine, maybe she isn't, and we won't tell you". Which is not as good as what we had, in my opinion, but about the best we could hope to get after the (imo again) setting miscarriage of 4e.
THIS.
Couldn't agree more.
This is my hope as well. The mistreatment of the deities, more so even than the many inconsistencies of the the Spellplague (which really irked me), are really what turned me off to the 4e Realms. |
| Tarlyn |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 16:48:55
quote:
Originally posted by Mapolq
I think - and let me stress the words I think - the approach will be "the gods are mysterious, maybe Selūne is Sehanine, maybe she isn't, and we won't tell you". Which is not as good as what we had, in my opinion, but about the best we could hope to get after the (imo again) setting miscarriage of 4e.
+1. That is the impression I got as well and I have the exact same feelings on the fix. It is better than the last era, but worse than what came before it. |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 16:46:12
quote:
Originally posted by VexHaus
Starting to get the vague impression that the 4e changes may not have been exactly well received by a not so insignificant population on this board, heh 
You should have seen the WoTc boards after 4th edition FR came out. It's like someone screamed Anthrax and everyone ran in terror. |
| VexHaus |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 16:41:09
Starting to get the vague impression that the 4e changes may not have been exactly well received by a not so insignificant population on this board, heh |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 16:33:16
When it comes to 4e there is no depth or sense to miss. Skip the 4e lore and use 3e it makes sense at least and then if u do miss anything we can at least help u out |
| VexHaus |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 16:06:29
Something else worth noting is that when two separate cultures with their own pantheons begin intermingling and the pantheons begin merging, their respective deities with overlapping portfolios supposedly come to blows with the loser either becoming subservient to the victor (e.g. Tempus vs. Garagos) or being outright destroyed (e.g. Talona vs. Kiputytto).
But say in the hypothetical future humans begin absorbing elven culture to the point that the Faerūnian pantheon and the Seldarine end up merging. If, say, Sune and Hanali Celanil turned out to really be two different racial aspects of the same divine being, would they still come into direct competition or would they just kinda chill together as equals like interracial twins and share worshipers?
And if different racial deities are simply representative 'faces' for the same basic divine concepts and portfolios, then why is it that someone who utterly devotes themselves to worship and reverence of a particular portfolio ideals could still end up destined for the Wall Of The Faithless just because they never decided to acknowledge any of these particular faces? Or am I missing something here? (as is usually the case, I admit) |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 15:04:27
Exactly so mystra was a god on toril with worshippers on earth.
The imaskari kidnapped those worshippers fron earth and prevented mystra from coming to their rescue.
So mystra sent an avatar of herself to earth so it could get on a ship and sail through space to toril so that she could rescue her earth worshippers on toril.
Once rescued mystras avatar then couldnt rejoin with her deific self even though she was on the same planet and so had to create a mortal manifestation.
Make sense? Thought so, and thats why 4e failed. |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 14:56:19
quote:
Originally posted by VexHaus
I don't necessarily have a problem with several deities being different aspects of each other across different pantheons, especially several of the supposedly ancient deities like Selūne, Shar, Chauntea, etc. who play a role in early creation mythologies as they often represent primal forces that people across many cultures would likely worship and revere. Heck, I don't even necessarily take the Selūne/Shar creation story to be complete factual history either, but rather as a myth steeped in evocative imagery that illustrates how the world works, the eternal conflict of good vs. evil, light vs. dark, etc. Also, you could turn it around and think from the perspective of a demi-human and say something like, "Wait, you mean Selūne was really just a human aspect of Sehanine Moonbow? How appallingly elven-centric this is!"
That being said, I do wonder about a problem this presents. There are dozens of deities in the Forgotten Realms setting with definite concrete and historical origin stories, e.g. interloper deities like the Seldarine, the Mulhorandi Pantheon, and Tyr, or mortals who ascended to divine status like Torm. How do you account for these deities having been different aspects of others native to Faerūn? For example, if Gruumsh didn't exist in Faerūn prior to the Orcgate Wars, then how could he and Talos have been the same being all along? It doesn't seem to make much sense to me without a lot of unnecessary complicated theological backtracking.
Something else I've wondered as well as a part of the 3rd edition FR planar cosmology, say hypothetically certain deities of the Kara-Tur or Zakhara or Maztican pantheons were also different aspects of Faerūnian deities, then why would they maintain multiple divine demesnes across different continent-specific cosmologies with no overlap?
Mind you, I don't know much about how 4th edition works or how it's changed other than the basic "Blood War on hiatus, Asmodeus is a god, Mystra died (yet again), geography nuked by spellplague, chaotic good and lawful evil don't exist anymore, and something-something Feywild and Returned-Abeir whatever the heck those are?"
I am behind on the times, yeesh.
It's not about being behind on the times, it just doesn't make sense in all fairness.
4th edition FR wasn't a well thought out project. It was liked throwing a grenade into the setting and trying to use what was left. |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 14:44:16
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
I think the idea was that many of the gods were actually a single being worshiped in different ways by different cultures/races. So, Mystra (Faerunian)=Isis (Mulhorandi)=whoever she would be to the elves (not exactly a solid correlation there). But I agree with you, it irked me to no end as well. One of the best things about the Realms, IMO, were the plethora of divine choices you had to center your worship.
I thought the Mulhorandi pantheon were gods from another dimension who followed their worshipers to Faerun when they were captured and trapped there? |
| VexHaus |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 12:29:22
I don't necessarily have a problem with several deities being different aspects of each other across different pantheons, especially several of the supposedly ancient deities like Selūne, Shar, Chauntea, etc. who play a role in early creation mythologies as they often represent primal forces that people across many cultures would likely worship and revere. Heck, I don't even necessarily take the Selūne/Shar creation story to be complete factual history either, but rather as a myth steeped in evocative imagery that illustrates how the world works, the eternal conflict of good vs. evil, light vs. dark, etc. Also, you could turn it around and think from the perspective of a demi-human and say something like, "Wait, you mean Selūne was really just a human aspect of Sehanine Moonbow? How appallingly elven-centric this is!"
That being said, I do wonder about a problem this presents. There are dozens of deities in the Forgotten Realms setting with definite concrete and historical origin stories, e.g. interloper deities like the Seldarine, the Mulhorandi Pantheon, and Tyr, or mortals who ascended to divine status like Torm. How do you account for these deities having been different aspects of others native to Faerūn? For example, if Gruumsh didn't exist in Faerūn prior to the Orcgate Wars, then how could he and Talos have been the same being all along? It doesn't seem to make much sense to me without a lot of unnecessary complicated theological backtracking.
Something else I've wondered as well as a part of the 3rd edition FR planar cosmology, say hypothetically certain deities of the Kara-Tur or Zakhara or Maztican pantheons were also different aspects of Faerūnian deities, then why would they maintain multiple divine demesnes across different continent-specific cosmologies with no overlap?
Mind you, I don't know much about how 4th edition works or how it's changed other than the basic "Blood War on hiatus, Asmodeus is a god, Mystra died (yet again), geography nuked by spellplague, chaotic good and lawful evil don't exist anymore, and something-something Feywild and Returned-Abeir whatever the heck those are?"
I am behind on the times, yeesh. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 09:05:51
Personally, I like that deities have different aspects. I believe that it adds further depth to their personality and also shows that they're will to go to extreme lenghts to gain worshippers. Talos being an aspect of Gruumsh, to me, makes sense and makes interactions between these two worshippers interesting. Its also not common knowledge in the wider world. General people on Toril have no idea that Selūne has an elven aspect, for example. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 06:07:30
Whether or not deities have multiple aspects or faces should be an individual campaign decision not forced on by wizbro. Reducing the number of gods limited individual choices which I don't see as a good thing. Before 4e DMs were free to spin as they wished without really violating canon...now they would. Besides, the Realms was always known for having a multitude of gods and wizbro's changing that seemed arbitrary. |
| MrHedgehog |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 04:27:14
I think you are missing the bigger picture. Also look at Hinduism where deities are all aspects of each other. There are other concepts of divinity than them being like people. Deities shouldn't just be like people they are vast mysterious entities that see many things, do many things, and are many things all at once. Do you not think deities should have multiple aspects/faces? |
| sfdragon |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 03:38:13
and sehanine came from somewhere else.....
that was not one of the best changes that 4e made, to alot of us, it was the worst decision mae.... right after the colors of the map.....
btw Chauntea is NOT Yondalla.... |
| MrHedgehog |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 02:53:46
This is one of the best changes 4e made in my opinion.
Having similar deities for multiple races was redundant.
The Gods were generally not "human" but personifications of forces in the world such as "magic" or "the moon". Selune/Shar/Chauntea seem to have come into existence long, long before humans came into existence, for example. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 02:38:32
quote:
Originally posted by Mapolq
I think - and let me stress the words I think - the approach will be "the gods are mysterious, maybe Selūne is Sehanine, maybe she isn't, and we won't tell you". Which is not as good as what we had, in my opinion, but about the best we could hope to get after the (imo again) setting miscarriage of 4e.
THIS.
Couldn't agree more. |
| Mapolq |
Posted - 01 Feb 2014 : 00:22:06
I think - and let me stress the words I think - the approach will be "the gods are mysterious, maybe Selūne is Sehanine, maybe she isn't, and we won't tell you". Which is not as good as what we had, in my opinion, but about the best we could hope to get after the (imo again) setting miscarriage of 4e. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 31 Jan 2014 : 21:32:13
I think the idea was that many of the gods were actually a single being worshiped in different ways by different cultures/races. So, Mystra (Faerunian)=Isis (Mulhorandi)=whoever she would be to the elves (not exactly a solid correlation there). But I agree with you, it irked me to no end as well. One of the best things about the Realms, IMO, were the plethora of divine choices you had to center your worship. |
| hashimashadoo |
Posted - 31 Jan 2014 : 18:09:20
There's not actually that many 'human' gods. There is just a pantheon that is primarily worshiped by humans (because there are a lot of them and their belief systems are particularly diverse).
All we know for sure is that a lot of 'dead' gods are coming back. I personally doubt there'll be much in the way of retcons but there may be explanations that involve metaphysical upheaval and aspects. |
|
|
