| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 14 Jul 2004 : 02:49:07
Seeing as you wrote the 2 Books which are the source of the arguement, I figured you'd be the one to settle it.
The Crux of the Arguement is who has Bhaals portfolios in 1373
In Faithes and Avatars Bhaals portfolios where Death, especially Violent or ritual death. He was also known as the Lord of Murder.
In 3ed Bhaal of cause hasnt been published (well excpet in Dragon 322 which I dont have)
However in 3ed its possiable that 2 gods have his portfolios
Kelemvor has the Death portfolio and Cyric has the Murder portfolio
My arguement is that Cyric currently has Bhaals portfolio, the Murder portfolio is Bhaals old "Death especially Violent" all youve done is changed the name.
Mirteks arguement is that Kelemvor holds Bhaals portfolios as the Death portfolio is mentioned in both Bhaals 2ed entry and Kelemvors 3ed Entry
Eviedence that supports my position:
1)There is no mention of Kelemvor having former followers of Bhaal amongst his worshipers in Faithes and Pantheons or Faithes and Avatars
2) 2ed Faithes and Avatars stats that Bhaalist continued to convert to Cyrics worship even after Kelemvor became a god.
3)Former Bhaalist are listed as Followers of Cyric in Faithes and Avatars.
So if Bhaal one an Unfair dismissal case against Ao who would have to hand there portfolios badck to Bhaal? |
| 20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| cpthero2 |
Posted - 15 Feb 2020 : 02:47:20
Great Reader Brimstone,
Agreed! Yet another fantastic reason why going back and bringing back these fantastic posts is well worth it! :)
Best regards,
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
16 years later??
That is some Sage Time(TM) that would make The Old Sage PROUD!
|
| Brimstone |
Posted - 15 Feb 2020 : 02:38:25
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
16 years later??
That is some Sage Time(TM) that would make The Old Sage PROUD! |
| cpthero2 |
Posted - 14 Feb 2020 : 10:21:26
Eric,
Thank you good sir!
Best regards,
quote:
Originally posted by ericlboyd
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
16 years later??
After thinking about it for 16 years, I'd have to say Cyric, much as I despise the bastard.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 14 Feb 2020 : 02:19:12
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
quote:
Originally posted by ericlboyd
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
16 years later??
After thinking about it for 16 years, I'd have to say Cyric, much as I despise the bastard.
Now that's some Phillip level of procrastination there 
I will give Eric credit for taking the time to consider all the relevant angles.  |
| cpthero2 |
Posted - 14 Feb 2020 : 01:16:49
Great Reader sleyvas,
I must be honest in admitting that my hatred for 4e and what was done to the Realms motivated it. I am slowly getting over it. ;)
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
quote:
Originally posted by ericlboyd
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
16 years later??
After thinking about it for 16 years, I'd have to say Cyric, much as I despise the bastard.
Now that's some Phillip level of procrastination there
|
| George Krashos |
Posted - 14 Feb 2020 : 00:58:52
quote:
Originally posted by ericlboyd
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
16 years later??
After thinking about it for 16 years, I'd have to say Cyric, much as I despise the bastard.
-- George Krashos |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 13 Feb 2020 : 23:55:23
quote:
Originally posted by ericlboyd
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
16 years later??
After thinking about it for 16 years, I'd have to say Cyric, much as I despise the bastard.
Now that's some Phillip level of procrastination there |
| cpthero2 |
Posted - 13 Feb 2020 : 20:42:48
Master Rupert and Great Reader Sleyvas,
It is true. Guilty as charged!
I also want to say that I appreciate the opportunity to do so. I haven't gone full on 5e/4e, so I go through some of the older stuff.
That being said, when I know I've hit the wall on something with one bump, and nothing comes, I do unsubscribe (I've been doing that the last few days), so that my interest won't turn into something it shouldn't. :)
Best regards as always gentleman!
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
16 years later??
Cpthero has a fondness for unearthing older discussions. 
|
| ericlboyd |
Posted - 13 Feb 2020 : 19:03:19
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
16 years later??
After thinking about it for 16 years, I'd have to say Cyric, much as I despise the bastard. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 13 Feb 2020 : 18:05:47
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
16 years later??
Cpthero has a fondness for unearthing older discussions. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 13 Feb 2020 : 14:25:49
16 years later?? |
| cpthero2 |
Posted - 13 Feb 2020 : 10:28:28
Good morning all,
Was there ever a response from Mr. Boyd on this?
Bumpin...
Best regards,
|
| cpthero2 |
Posted - 01 Oct 2018 : 15:42:46
Great Reader Dargoth,
Was there ever a response off site to your question from Mr. Boyd?
Best regards,
quote:
Originally posted by Dargoth
Seeing as you wrote the 2 Books which are the source of the arguement, I figured you'd be the one to settle it.
The Crux of the Arguement is who has Bhaals portfolios in 1373
In Faithes and Avatars Bhaals portfolios where Death, especially Violent or ritual death. He was also known as the Lord of Murder.
In 3ed Bhaal of cause hasnt been published (well excpet in Dragon 322 which I dont have)
However in 3ed its possiable that 2 gods have his portfolios
Kelemvor has the Death portfolio and Cyric has the Murder portfolio
My arguement is that Cyric currently has Bhaals portfolio, the Murder portfolio is Bhaals old "Death especially Violent" all youve done is changed the name.
Mirteks arguement is that Kelemvor holds Bhaals portfolios as the Death portfolio is mentioned in both Bhaals 2ed entry and Kelemvors 3ed Entry
Eviedence that supports my position:
1)There is no mention of Kelemvor having former followers of Bhaal amongst his worshipers in Faithes and Pantheons or Faithes and Avatars
2) 2ed Faithes and Avatars stats that Bhaalist continued to convert to Cyrics worship even after Kelemvor became a god.
3)Former Bhaalist are listed as Followers of Cyric in Faithes and Avatars.
So if Bhaal one an Unfair dismissal case against Ao who would have to hand there portfolios badck to Bhaal?
|
| The Wanderer |
Posted - 14 Jul 2004 : 16:46:27
quote:
Originally posted by Sarelle
Or just ignore it, as I do! Seriously - many of Bhaal's worshippers were crazed killers who most certainly would NOT have been Lawful-anything.
In 2e each deity had its own borders (Bhaal's were 'Any evil', I believe), that made sense. So its the 2e rules that I stick with.
I agree with you there. I see no reason why it should be constrained in any way as long as it is murder.
[quote]Originally posted by
15 years is recent? We're talking about humans, here, not elves or dwarves.
[quote]
Well, recently is most definetly a subjective term. I still believe though it is a plausible time frame, even for humans. People can be stubborn . |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 14 Jul 2004 : 15:39:22
quote:
Originally posted by Anubis
I believe we can side-step the One Step rule by saying that Bhaals worhippers have yet to completely turn to Cyric, since their god died relatively recently. Perhaps Cyric could declare a culling in the future.
15 years is recent? We're talking about humans, here, not elves or dwarves. |
| Sarelle |
Posted - 14 Jul 2004 : 15:23:17
quote:
Originally posted by Anubis
I believe we can side-step the One Step rule
Or just ignore it, as I do! Seriously - many of Bhaal's worshippers were crazed killers who most certainly would NOT have been Lawful-anything.
In 2e each deity had its own borders (Bhaal's were 'Any evil', I believe), that made sense. So its the 2e rules that I stick with. |
| The Wanderer |
Posted - 14 Jul 2004 : 12:59:25
I believe that Garen Thaal's interpretation is the opinion that I alo favor. Myrkul used to be the God of Death while Bhaal was the Lord of Murder. Cyric replaced both, so he was god of Death and murder. When Kelemvor was made a god, he inherited Myrkul's role, but Cyric stayed with Bhaal's portfolio.
I believe we can side-step the One Step rule by saying that Bhaals worhippers have yet to completely turn to Cyric, since their god died relatively recently. Perhaps Cyric could declare a culling in the future. |
| Derulbaskul |
Posted - 14 Jul 2004 : 03:49:27
What if Bane was secretly sponsoring these holdouts from Cyric albeit in Bhaal's name? |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 14 Jul 2004 : 03:33:54
Given the new One step rule in 3ed Cyric cant support all of Bhaals worshipers, the LE and LN followers of Bhaal cant worship Cyric as hes more than 1 alignment step away from those Alignments. |
| Garen Thal |
Posted - 14 Jul 2004 : 03:06:26
I think the clearest (and still the most confusing answer) is that the wider portfolio of "death" was split when it was taken from Cyric. Cyric had gathered both death and the dead in his portfolio when he ascended to godhood, combining the roles of Myrkul and Bhaal in to one superportfolio dealing with the end of life and its aftermath.
Prior to their falls, Myrkul seemed to be the god of the processes of death, having such portfolio elements as wasting, old age, decay, and dusk. Bhaal, for his part, was the god of the moment of death, which is why his aspect focuses on murder and other violent death (and, consequently, why Myrkul is more powerful than he).
Cyric's assumption of both these duties unblurred the lines between death and the dead, between sudden murder and death from disease or old age. When Kelemvor finally became god of the dead, he took over both Myrkul's role as the god of natural death and the dead, and Bhaal's mantle as god of sudden deaths. Only the more specific element of murder--which is the act of the killer, not of the killed--was retained by Cyric.
After ten years under Cyric, most Bhaalyn would be loth to move over to Kelemvor, when they had a perfectly good Lord of Murder in Cyric. While Kelemvor has the majority of the portfolio of Bhaal, with murder (again, technically not really a part of death so much as it is a violent act), Cyric has assumed nearly all of his worship.
Of course, this is all my own interpretation, and Eric is free to disagree. |
