| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Feanor |
Posted - 25 Aug 2005 : 16:59:58
1. Can a god act directly against the tenets of his portofolio ? I mean : Torm telling a lie, Cyric behaving honorable, Tempus promoting peace, Tyr being unjust and so on... I am strongly convinced that a god cannot do that, because it goes against their nature.
2. If a mortal assumes the portofolio of Death from Bhaal, can it remain a good god ? Personally, I think that a good-aligned mortal with such a portofolio would became evil or neutral.
3. What Tyr should do when he is confronted with a clear violation of the paladinic ethos by one of his paladins ? (A paladin who, driven by jealousy, accused unjustly a good character who was on the course of performing a task for the church of Tyr and also did a great service to that paladin in the past) Can he show mercy or he must apply a punishment ? Since Tyr is quite stiff-necked in this matters, I would assume he would be relentless.
|
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 31 Aug 2005 : 13:52:11
quote:
Originally posted by Talanfir Swiftfeet
Tymora is a goddess of good fortune and Beshaba is a goddess of bad fortune. They are both a part of Tyche who was once a goddess of fortune (both good and bad). So if Bane took Sunes love portfolio and added it to his portfolio of hate would that make him a god of emotions? Or maybe he has to take other portfolios of emotions. Is there a god of envy or friendship?
I think that might be a bit too "specialized", at least to my taste. My opinion is that since each god's power is dependant on the amount of his/her worshippers, the deities try to keep their portfolios about more "major" aspects. I agree that there could be a God of Envy, but what would be the point, if you can be the God of Hatred and Strife? And would you really want to become a God of Grass and Leaves, if you can be a God of Nature and Trees? Not to mention that you might have to wrest that small part of portfolio from an existing major power...
|
| Talanfir Swiftfeet |
Posted - 31 Aug 2005 : 13:45:18
Tymora is a goddess of good fortune and Beshaba is a goddess of bad fortune. They are both a part of Tyche who was once a goddess of fortune (both good and bad). So if Bane took Sunes love portfolio and added it to his portfolio of hate would that make him a god of emotions? Or maybe he has to take other portfolios of emotions. Is there a god of envy or friendship? |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 31 Aug 2005 : 13:28:04
Melfius, Bane might also be interested in gaining more "Godly Power" (or Divine Might) by slaying Sune, if only possible. If we assume that gods (their personalities and portfolio) are not influenced by the divine might they absorb from dead/slain deities, then any deity might be a suitable victim for more ruthless gods. |
| StromLancer |
Posted - 29 Aug 2005 : 13:39:01
quote:
Originally posted by Shadovar
Wouldn't it be better if Bane took over Shar's and Lathander's portfolios? Mask portfolios will do nicely for Bane.
Huh? So tomorrow morning my PC will see the sun rising with Bane leading the sunrise? Oh no!
Bane assuming control of the shadow weave? Then Mystra sure got a big headache already. |
| Shadovar |
Posted - 29 Aug 2005 : 13:19:27
Wouldn't it be better if Bane took over Shar's and Lathander's portfolios? Mask portfolios will do nicely for Bane. |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 29 Aug 2005 : 08:31:09
quote:
Originally posted by Melfius
Also, from what has not been written about, I don't think Bane is even interested in Sune's portfolio. Tempus and Helm, maybe, but not Sune.
Unless he wished to pervert the whole concept of 'Love'  
But I only used it as an example, although IF Bane would seize Sune's portfolio, I don't think Ao would intervene as long as he fulfilled his duty also as the God of Love... no matter how twisted and hated that Love would be |
| Melfius |
Posted - 28 Aug 2005 : 23:45:41
Also, from what has not been written about, I don't think Bane is even interested in Sune's portfolio. Tempus and Helm, maybe, but not Sune. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 28 Aug 2005 : 17:14:19
quote:
Originally posted by Feanor
I can't see at all Bane taking love, because it would oppose his other portofolio "Hatred". It would come to a paradox, like someone who is at the same time prime-minister of Israel and boss of Hamas. Even if he twists it according to his own views, he will still have to promote a kind of love. Even this "love your better" will clash with his duty to promote hatred.
Second, if he emphasizes only the negative aspect of love, he would piss off Ao, since such an attitude would threaten the balance and probably Ao would take love back from him.
I have to agree. He's simply not suited to the portfolio. |
| Feanor |
Posted - 28 Aug 2005 : 15:31:52
quote:
Originally posted by Asgetrion
I think Bane would probably assume Sune's divine power and convert it to more "general" form, becoming stronger in divine might but ignoring the portfolio of Love. However, as we have seen in previous Realmslore, when a god slays another, they usually take on the portfolio of their victim.
So maybe Bane would take on the portfolio of Love, but twist it to a more bitter version of love - causing heartbreaks and tears in all affairs everywhere on Faerun. It could also be possible that being the god of love would eventually affect Bane, but if he had chosen to be the god of "teary-eyed lovers and bittersweet love" (or something like that ;) it might be that he'd not be affected by it. I think being the god of unhappy love would actually benefit Bane in general, since it would certainly cause more strife and hatred
Anyway, I wish to thank all you fellow scribes and sages for your excellent contributions to this thread - I only wish that the WoTC game designers would read them and convert them to published Realmslore 
I can't see at all Bane taking love, because it would oppose his other portofolio "Hatred". It would come to a paradox, like someone who is at the same time prime-minister of Israel and boss of Hamas. Even if he twists it according to his own views, he will still have to promote a kind of love. Even this "love your better" will clash with his duty to promote hatred.
Second, if he emphasizes only the negative aspect of love, he would piss off Ao, since such an attitude would threaten the balance and probably Ao would take love back from him. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 28 Aug 2005 : 15:23:20
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
The "do as they say" is a type of servitude, because you are being held under what some may consider to be the greatest tyrant of all -- love (not that I'm speaking from experience or anything *winks at the Lady K*  ).
Nice dodge.  |
| The Sage |
Posted - 28 Aug 2005 : 15:20:08
That works, because it also plays on Bane's "tyranny" aspect.
The "do as they say" is a type of servitude, because you are being held under what some may consider to be the greatest tyrant of all -- love (not that I'm speaking from experience or anything *winks at the Lady K* ).
|
| Dargoth |
Posted - 28 Aug 2005 : 13:19:43
I could see Bane perverting Love, turning it to "Love your betters and do as they say" |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 28 Aug 2005 : 11:39:12
quote:
Originally posted by Dargoth
Lets assume that Bane god of Hatred killed Sune the goddess of Love
Technically Bane would have the option of being the God of Love.
I suspect one of the following would take place
1) Bane would just drop the Love portfolio as he prefers hatred over love
2) Bane might want the Portfolio of Love but AO steps in and says no you cant have as he doesnt believe Bane can do the Love and Hatred Domains justice
3)Bane takes the Love portfolio but doesnt advocate it in affect Bane is still the God of Tyranny, Hatred and Fear but hes also got the portfolio of Love which hes not actively using. There could not be another God of Love unless someone defeats Bane and takes if from him
I think Bane would probably assume Sune's divine power and convert it to more "general" form, becoming stronger in divine might but ignoring the portfolio of Love. However, as we have seen in previous Realmslore, when a god slays another, they usually take on the portfolio of their victim.
So maybe Bane would take on the portfolio of Love, but twist it to a more bitter version of love - causing heartbreaks and tears in all affairs everywhere on Faerun. It could also be possible that being the god of love would eventually affect Bane, but if he had chosen to be the god of "teary-eyed lovers and bittersweet love" (or something like that ;) it might be that he'd not be affected by it. I think being the god of unhappy love would actually benefit Bane in general, since it would certainly cause more strife and hatred
Anyway, I wish to thank all you fellow scribes and sages for your excellent contributions to this thread - I only wish that the WoTC game designers would read them and convert them to published Realmslore |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 28 Aug 2005 : 06:04:30
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
I suppose that is another likely facet for gods who have picked up extra portfolios from other powers -- interpreting the specific portfolio from their own perspective rather than using the portfolio "as is".
In other words, the portfolio of rot as envisioned by Moander was used quite differently from how it is now employed by Finder.
Ditto for Kelemvor. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 28 Aug 2005 : 04:31:19
I suppose that is another likely facet for gods who have picked up extra portfolios from other powers -- interpreting the specific portfolio from their own perspective rather than using the portfolio "as is".
In other words, the portfolio of rot as envisioned by Moander was used quite differently from how it is now employed by Finder.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 27 Aug 2005 : 18:17:00
quote:
Originally posted by Dargoth
Umm Finder Wyvernspur has rot as one of the portfolios he picked up from Moander but hes not encouraging rot
He doesn't encourage rot for the sake of something decaying. He encourages it as a part of the cycle of life and creativity -- a natural state, and one is merely part of a cycle, a place to grow from. |
| Melfius |
Posted - 27 Aug 2005 : 10:15:42
In a way, he is. He is just viewing it in an altogether different way. Instead of just seeing rot as something that happens to vegitation, he views it as stagnation from refusal to change. More of a rotting of the soul. |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 27 Aug 2005 : 07:38:24
Umm Finder Wyvernspur has rot as one of the portfolios he picked up from Moander but hes not encouraging rot |
| The Sage |
Posted - 27 Aug 2005 : 06:52:54
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I doubt Ao would allow a deity to hold a portfolio if they weren't suited to it...
Indeed. To do so would threaten the Balance.
quote:
I doubt even more he'd allow a deity to hold but ignore a portfolio. Besides, if the holder of a portfolio wasn't doing anything for the portfolio, that would be cause for them to either have it stripped away, or lose it to a deity that would enforce it. At least, that's my take on it.
We can assume though that Ao would, at the very least, try to determine why a particular deity may be ignoring a certain portfolio -- before any actual decision is made.
For example, lesser gods or demi-powers may be subtlely pressured by gods of higher ranking to ignore a particular portfolio, or rather, spend less time enforcing it than they would their primary aspects.
|
| Shadovar |
Posted - 27 Aug 2005 : 06:09:21
quote:
Originally posted by Melfius
Actually, no deity exists without Ao's say-so.
I agree, afterall the balance must be maintained. |
| Melfius |
Posted - 27 Aug 2005 : 04:51:46
Actually, no deity exists without Ao's say-so. |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 27 Aug 2005 : 04:45:36
I consider that if a mortal rises to the level of deity it might not be AO that decides the portfolio.
I think that a NEW deity might be able to take on an aspect of the portfolio of the god that sponsored him (unless he DEFEATED that god). For example UBER the RANGER worships Sylvanus. Sylvanus sponsors him. When he ascends Sylvanus grants him the portfolio of Wolves since it falls within his portfolio of Wild Nature.
Also the portfolios seem to range in power. We have Sylvanus WILD NATURE and Mielikki Forests or forest creatures.
I think it is OK to make new Portfolios without upsetting any sort of balance.
If in my campaign The players actions allow THOR to enter the realms then Talos is going to LOSE storms, and Thor is going to GAIN it as his portfolio. But I am also creating a portfolio of THUNDER which will be Thors alone.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 27 Aug 2005 : 02:59:13
I doubt Ao would allow a deity to hold a portfolio if they weren't suited to it...
I doubt even more he'd allow a deity to hold but ignore a portfolio. Besides, if the holder of a portfolio wasn't doing anything for the portfolio, that would be cause for them to either have it stripped away, or lose it to a deity that would enforce it. At least, that's my take on it. |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 27 Aug 2005 : 01:21:45
Lets assume that Bane god of Hatred killed Sune the goddess of Love
Technically Bane would have the option of being the God of Love.
I suspect one of the following would take place
1) Bane would just drop the Love portfolio as he prefers hatred over love
2) Bane might want the Portfolio of Love but AO steps in and says no you cant have as he doesnt believe Bane can do the Love and Hatred Domains justice
3)Bane takes the Love portfolio but doesnt advocate it in affect Bane is still the God of Tyranny, Hatred and Fear but hes also got the portfolio of Love which hes not actively using. There could not be another God of Love unless someone defeats Bane and takes if from him |
| Melfius |
Posted - 27 Aug 2005 : 01:03:46
So what you are saying is that death is a force of nature, like birth and growth? Good point! |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 26 Aug 2005 : 23:52:40
Death is a natural force. It is not evil or good.
Murder is evil. Death is a result of murder, but is not itself evil.
Giving your life for another is good. Death resulting from this altruism is not itself good.
The Lion that kills the Gazelle is doing nothing evil, but death results.
Is birth good? Is the birth of the murderer that kills an innocent an evil birth?
Look I understand why so often death is assigned to evil gods. But even in myth the gods of the dead were not always evil, and I would argue that it is arbitrary to assign alignments to mythological gods.
Odin is considered a lawful good god in 1e, and Chaotic good I beleive in 3e. Odin did some things in the myths that one would consider evil. It was not about good or evil. It was about what had to be done.
Death is not good. Infact alot of the writings on death (Modern writings that is) discusses it as a peaceful event. Full of mourning for the deceased loved ones, and full of peace for the deceased.
Who knows? I would refute the point though that a good god of death would become corrupted. I do not think said deity would. I do not beleive DEATH is an evil force.
|
| Kuje |
Posted - 26 Aug 2005 : 19:21:48
quote:
Originally posted by AsgetrionActually, there is a difference between the dead and death... as Bhaal notes in the F&A myth which tells about how Bhaal, Bane and Myrkul ascended to divinity and confronted Jergal. I don't approve of this change in the Lost Empires 
I know there is but the game designers feel there isn't and so they made that change in Lost Empires. |
| Melfius |
Posted - 26 Aug 2005 : 18:45:19
Being a good-aligned God of Death or the Dead would be a matter of outlook. Where in the sceme of life do you focus? An early death? No, that's a bad thing. Death granted after a long, fruitful life? That's good. Death granted to those that would otherwise suffer unnecessarily over a long period? That might be good as well. (Please, I don't want to debate the topic of euthanasia!) I think Kelemvor is doing a good job, being good. He is commissioning crusaders to combat undeath. He believes in dying valiantly in battle. What do you think? |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 26 Aug 2005 : 18:30:22
Feanor, I think a good god may become a god of death, but certainly his portfolio will eventually start affecting/twisting his/her personality. Prime examples of this are Kelemvor and Cyric... |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 26 Aug 2005 : 18:28:26
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
1. I'd say they can, but it would be exceedingly unlikely. It may go against Torm's nature to tell a lie, for example, but that doesn't mean he's incapable of doing so. Of course, it might be damaging to his portfolio to do so...
2. Bhaal doesn't have death, and didn't have it when he was around. He was all about murder. Jergal held Death, then Myrkul, then Cyric, and now Kelemvor.
Actually, Bhaal did have death according to 1e and 2e lore, but Lost Empires gave it to Myrkul and I asked Rich about it and he said there wasn't much difference between the dead and death and so Myrkul is both the god of the dead and death. :)
Actually, there is a difference between the dead and death... as Bhaal notes in the F&A myth which tells about how Bhaal, Bane and Myrkul ascended to divinity and confronted Jergal. I don't approve of this change in the Lost Empires |
