| Author |
 Topic  |
|
silverwolfer
Senior Scribe
789 Posts |
 Posted - 29 Apr 2014 : 17:03:08
|
|
Just wondering, do you think Osiris and all those will come back and fight Sset again?
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 29 Apr 2014 : 17:19:49
|
As much as I like the Old Empires, I'm giving up on the 2e Mulhorand coming back in 5e. Partly because the Earth-Realms connection between the pantheons was overplayed and subsequent coverups just compounded the problems and resulted in screwing up Imaskar as well.
So no, I don't think WotC will bring them back... and I don't think they should. I don't want the Egyptian pantheon in the Realms. The Realms is a place for creativity, and importing pantheons from elsewhere is the antithesis of creativity. I do want Mulhorand and Unther to have God-Kings which are made of different stuff than the powers, but I can be content with developing that in my own games.
On a slight tangent, I also think the other gods who were imported from Earth's pantheons need to be renamed at least and preferably given unique personalities. Loviatar, Mielikki, Oghma, and Tyr come to mind... make them unique to the Realms please, WotC. |
 |
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 29 Apr 2014 : 17:43:19
|
many of deities that carry teh rw mythology names may just be in name only. With the exception of Tyr, I have not seen or read anything to say to the contrary.
so if there is any that says otherwise , do say so, just dont say that its in Dragon issue #55 from 1980.
I like the names of the deities as they are.
as for the egyptian gods..... nothing against egypt or its mythology, but I'd rather they didnt, and Id love to see mulohaund gone permanently |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
Edited by - sfdragon on 29 Apr 2014 17:44:57 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36870 Posts |
Posted - 29 Apr 2014 : 18:42:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
On a slight tangent, I also think the other gods who were imported from Earth's pantheons need to be renamed at least and preferably given unique personalities. Loviatar, Mielikki, Oghma, and Tyr come to mind... make them unique to the Realms please, WotC.
With the possible exception of Tyr, most people will not recognize the origin of those deific names unless they either hail from the originating area, or they really know their mythology. I'm stronger on Greco-Roman mythology, myself, and I had been a Realms fan for more than a few years before I discovered the real world connections of the deities you name. I have some familiarity with Norse and Egyptian mythology, so I recognized those ones in the Realms, but Loviatar, Mielikki, and Oghma were unknown to me as anything other than FR deities.
And I discovered their origins, ironically, in a copy of Deities & Demigods!  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6381 Posts |
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 29 Apr 2014 : 19:06:29
|
I support your interpretation sfdragon... yes, they might only share a name rather than being the same deity. That's how the Mulhorandi and Untheric pantheons should have been done... completely separate entities who shared a name; then answering the question of how the Realms natives came to have those names becomes an opportunity for creativity. Instead, WotC declared them the same being, and they've been doing that ever since.
It irks me when they kill off the deities into which Ed put some amount of work... Bhaal, Myrkul, Leira, Mystra, etc... and leave the ones which are imported directly from mythology. And then write whole trilogies about "the gods" while somehow managing to avoid giving most of them any personality (or rational thought) at all. Meh.
If you're going to muck up the pantheon:
1) Wait more than 5 minutes after the setting is introduced before you go interpreting Ragnarok into the setting. I'm looking at you, whoever decided that the Time of Troubles should happen immediately after the doors open onto the Realms.
2) Kill off or modify the smaller investments of creativity first, rather than targeting the deities which distinguish the Realms from every other setting. I'll grant that Cyric was original, but his creation was utterly devoid of sense so he doesn't count.
If the past is any indicator of the future (and experience shows that it is) it doesn't matter which deities get brought back in 5e. They will get shuffled, dumbed down, and decimated during 5e's brief duration, and we'll see a smaller pantheon in 6e.
I'm not deliberately cynical or pessimistic. I'm just trying to say "stop and learn something" every way I can think of. Which I admit is crazy because if any WotC employee has ever read a word I've typed they undoubtedly stopped a long time ago.
But I keep trying, because the Realms is my home too. |
Edited by - xaeyruudh on 29 Apr 2014 19:09:59 |
|
|
|
Mirtek
Senior Scribe
595 Posts |
Posted - 29 Apr 2014 : 21:44:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by sfdragon
many of deities that carry teh rw mythology names may just be in name only. With the exception of Tyr, I have not seen or read anything to say to the contrary.
so if there is any that says otherwise , do say so, just dont say that its in Dragon issue #55 from 1980.
I like the names of the deities as they are.
as for the egyptian gods..... nothing against egypt or its mythology, but I'd rather they didnt, and Id love to see mulohaund gone permanently
It's in On Hallowed Grounds |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36870 Posts |
Posted - 29 Apr 2014 : 22:10:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mirtek
quote:
Originally posted by sfdragon
many of deities that carry teh rw mythology names may just be in name only. With the exception of Tyr, I have not seen or read anything to say to the contrary.
so if there is any that says otherwise , do say so, just dont say that its in Dragon issue #55 from 1980.
I like the names of the deities as they are.
as for the egyptian gods..... nothing against egypt or its mythology, but I'd rather they didnt, and Id love to see mulohaund gone permanently
It's in On Hallowed Grounds
And the same source says that Tyche -- the goddess of luck who split into Tymora and Beshaba -- has gone missing from the Greek pantheon, quite puzzling all the others in Olympus. We know Tyche was worshipped in the Realms before her sundering ( ), and that reference in On Hallowed Ground makes it clear she is a Greek goddess, as well. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Mirtek
Senior Scribe
595 Posts |
Posted - 29 Apr 2014 : 22:17:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Mirtek
quote:
Originally posted by sfdragon
many of deities that carry teh rw mythology names may just be in name only. With the exception of Tyr, I have not seen or read anything to say to the contrary.
so if there is any that says otherwise , do say so, just dont say that its in Dragon issue #55 from 1980.
I like the names of the deities as they are.
as for the egyptian gods..... nothing against egypt or its mythology, but I'd rather they didnt, and Id love to see mulohaund gone permanently
It's in On Hallowed Grounds
And the same source says that Tyche -- the goddess of luck who split into Tymora and Beshaba -- has gone missing from the Greek pantheon, quite puzzling all the others in Olympus. We know Tyche was worshipped in the Realms before her sundering (), and that reference in On Hallowed Ground makes it clear she is a Greek goddess, as well.
What's interesting is that OHG wonders whether or not she split voluntarily into the two. Could be her bid to escape from the olympians. Zeus is described as being very territorial and holding his pantheons in an iron grip. He would surely destroy Tyche if he had learned about her bit on the side with a foreign pantheon. That would also explain why the few olympians who actually bother enough to look for her (and not out of sibling's love, but just that if someone has actually killed her, that would be a slight to the honor of the olympian pantheon and a reason for them to go to war) have not yet discovered what happened. The churches of Tymora and Beshaba might be actively working against any priests of the olympian pantheon snooping around on Toril. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 29 Apr 2014 : 22:42:41
|
| The novel Tymoras Luck describes Tyches split in some detail, and although it features a kender vermin and is a bit soap-opera-ish, it is still an excellent (albeit surprisingly unknown) FR novel, and it provides *much* deity-specific Realmslore. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36870 Posts |
Posted - 29 Apr 2014 : 23:54:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
The novel Tymoras Luck describes Tyches split in some detail, and although it features a kender vermin and is a bit soap-opera-ish, it is still an excellent (albeit surprisingly unknown) FR novel, and it provides *much* deity-specific Realmslore.
It's one of my fave Realms novels -- it's Jeff Grubb and Kate Novak goodness. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1879 Posts |
Posted - 30 Apr 2014 : 03:04:46
|
| Guess I'm in the minority here, I liked Mulhorand/Unther as they were to begin with. Not saying things can't be altered to make them more unique (which I support), I'm just saying that part of ruining the published Realms for me included ridding the setting of the gods that were established in the region to begin with. I will say that if Wizbro allows Ed to put his vision of the region into play they likely wouldn't regret the decision. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 30 Apr 2014 : 08:27:07
|
yes I forgot about Tyche... so sue me, the court is in Silverymoon......
but yeah.... she would be greek..... but then, it could still be an interpretation... like what was said about helm, tyr and what not in the ...... I forget.... Elsium something....
but then I still say in name only...... |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1288 Posts |
Posted - 30 Apr 2014 : 15:25:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
As much as I like the Old Empires, I'm giving up on the 2e Mulhorand coming back in 5e. Partly because the Earth-Realms connection between the pantheons was overplayed and subsequent coverups just compounded the problems and resulted in screwing up Imaskar as well.
So no, I don't think WotC will bring them back... and I don't think they should. I don't want the Egyptian pantheon in the Realms. The Realms is a place for creativity, and importing pantheons from elsewhere is the antithesis of creativity. I do want Mulhorand and Unther to have God-Kings which are made of different stuff than the powers, but I can be content with developing that in my own games.
On a slight tangent, I also think the other gods who were imported from Earth's pantheons need to be renamed at least and preferably given unique personalities. Loviatar, Mielikki, Oghma, and Tyr come to mind... make them unique to the Realms please, WotC.
All four of those gods ARE absolutely unique to the realms. Please WOTC do not change their names. You forgot Ilmater and Tyche as well. These gods all have distinct flavor
How is this the antithesis of creativity? isn't it an act of creativity in itself to work out a way why they would be part of the realms?
There is a campaign being developed on the WOTC site where people think it is very creative to have orcs be the desert dwellers. HOW is this any more creative than having Egypt in the realms? HOW is it creative to take a race out of its stereotype and plug and play it somewhere else?
It is no more creative to use a race in a way it is NOT supposed to be used than using it in a way it is supposed to be used. It is easy to think of and do the opposite. Peaceful Klingons are not creative, they are just different.
I find alot of creativity is needed to make a place resembling Egypt work in the realms. Taking common knowledge and having it manifest in an interesting way, that is the intellectual process of creativity.
Claiming something is not creative because it is part of the real world and having a place in a fantasy world is not accurate. BY that count all those campaign worlds based on Earth History fail at creativity.
Golarion uses LOTS of different named gods. I do not Zon Kuhion any more creative than Loviatar. Especially since he is just from Hellraiser.
|
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
|
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1288 Posts |
Posted - 30 Apr 2014 : 15:31:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
I support your interpretation sfdragon... yes, they might only share a name rather than being the same deity. That's how the Mulhorandi and Untheric pantheons should have been done... completely separate entities who shared a name; then answering the question of how the Realms natives came to have those names becomes an opportunity for creativity. Instead, WotC declared them the same being, and they've been doing that ever since.
It irks me when they kill off the deities into which Ed put some amount of work... Bhaal, Myrkul, Leira, Mystra, etc... and leave the ones which are imported directly from mythology. And then write whole trilogies about "the gods" while somehow managing to avoid giving most of them any personality (or rational thought) at all. Meh.
If you're going to muck up the pantheon:
1) Wait more than 5 minutes after the setting is introduced before you go interpreting Ragnarok into the setting. I'm looking at you, whoever decided that the Time of Troubles should happen immediately after the doors open onto the Realms.
2) Kill off or modify the smaller investments of creativity first, rather than targeting the deities which distinguish the Realms from every other setting. I'll grant that Cyric was original, but his creation was utterly devoid of sense so he doesn't count.
If the past is any indicator of the future (and experience shows that it is) it doesn't matter which deities get brought back in 5e. They will get shuffled, dumbed down, and decimated during 5e's brief duration, and we'll see a smaller pantheon in 6e.
I'm not deliberately cynical or pessimistic. I'm just trying to say "stop and learn something" every way I can think of. Which I admit is crazy because if any WotC employee has ever read a word I've typed they undoubtedly stopped a long time ago.
But I keep trying, because the Realms is my home too.
Find the article Down to Earth Divinity from 1981 in dragon. It explains Ed Greenwoods process and decision making for why he brought in the real world gods.
He also wanted Aslan from Narnia in the realms. Does that make him not creative?
His elemental lords and beast lords are from Michael Moorcock. Lack of creativity?
|
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36870 Posts |
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 30 Apr 2014 : 17:42:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
On a slight tangent, I also think the other gods who were imported from Earth's pantheons need to be renamed at least and preferably given unique personalities. Loviatar, Mielikki, Oghma, and Tyr come to mind... make them unique to the Realms please, WotC.
All four of those gods ARE absolutely unique to the realms. Please WOTC do not change their names. You forgot Ilmater and Tyche as well. These gods all have distinct flavor
Loviatar, Mielikki, and Oghma were copied straight from Deities & Demigods. Tyr was copied except for his "war" aspect. Ed said so himself. So... no, they're absolutely not unique to the Realms. Kinda the exact opposite of unique. Ilmater is similar to Issek of the Jug but he was renamed and tweaked a bit, which is why he's not on my list. Tyche was a combination of Tyche and Bes, and later split into Tymora and Beshaba. I was listing powers who were copied directly from mythology, without editing... I goofed a bit on Tyr, since he got a small edit, and I forgot Silvanus who was also a direct copy. Even without war in his portfolio, though, Tyr's followers are still a militant bunch so it's a small edit.
Where is this flavor you mention? Tyr is Tyr. If Loviatar's personality has been developed in a novel or sourcebook, I haven't seen it. Oghma has a few lines in Prince of Lies I think, and maybe Crucible... it's been a while and I don't remember the specifics. If any creativity has gone into these deities, I've missed it and that would be my bad. If it's there.
No mental gymnastics are necessary to fit Quetzalcoatl into the Realms. Maztica, or possibly Chult. Done. Pan? Sure, make him the god of satyrs. I'm not saying this is a bad thing... I'm just saying it's not creative. No, it's not inherently creative to find a way to put them in the Realms. Creativity is in personality (shown through interactions with priests, followers, and other gods), history within the Realms, and a reason for being here. Not the designer's reason for putting them in the Realms... the power's reason for being here. Something more compelling than "people worship me here." Sticking every god from every mythos on Earth into the Realms would not be creative. It would be a mess.
Azuth is Aarth. But this works, because he's renamed and when we think of Azuth we don't mentally go "oh, that's Aarth." We think he's a unique power... and over time and with a little writing Azuth becomes distinct from Aarth. We don't have Druaga; we have Bane. Instead of the generic Demeter, Hephaestus, and Aphrodite, we have Chauntea, Gond, and Sune. Mask is a dark reflection of Hermes; that's creative. Talona was originally Kiputytto, though that was overwritten somewhere to say that she defeated Kiputytto. Ed acknowledged all of this, in Down-to-earth Divinity.
And I'm not criticizing his choices for the pantheon. I'm merely saying I like the ones who are given new names and a bit of personality better than the ones who aren't, and I think it was XYZ of the suits to kill off several unique powers while leaving the generic ones unscathed. Several different words and ideas can be substituted in place of XYZ: Rude, callous-at-best, a slap in the face, destructive to the setting, and as we can see in hindsight it was a harbinger of far worse things to come.
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
Peaceful Klingons are not creative, they are just different.
This is like saying "when you add something, you don't get more, you just get the opposite of less." I'm not disagreeing with the underlying idea that putting orcs in the desert or making peaceful klingons doesn't necessarily add anything to the setting and, incidentally, I'm not a fan of either idea. Partly because we did all that adapting all kinds of monsters to different habitats in 2e so the possibility of changing the habitat is already there whenever I look at a monster. I am disagreeing with the statement that these ideas didn't demonstrate even a shred of creativity the first time they were conceived. Divergence is a foundation of creativity.
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
I find alot of creativity is needed to make a place resembling Egypt work in the realms.
Yes! It was more creative when Scott Bennie did it back in 1990 than it would be today, after we've seen places like Chult and Maztica, but it's great either way.
But the key is that it resemble Egypt without being Egypt. I know we get the distinction, but WotC does not. Mulhorand needs to have just enough similarity to evoke a certain familiarity and confidence, while still remaining completely new and fresh. I don't know much about Egypt... I've never been there, I've never had any close Egyptian friends, and I don't think I've ever even heard the language spoken. But I can google it and find a ton of pictures and names and historical details... and that gives me jumping off points for creating Mulhorand, and the gumption to describe it for my players without worrying about the extremes of (A) making up something completely new on my own or (B) remaining "true" to a real-world country. Scott Bennie basically did that, although he used some real-world names for NPCs, but those are easily changed.
The problem is that the same creativity was not used with respect to the Mulhorandi pantheon. The names of the God-Kings are all identical to the names of deities from various periods of Egyptian mythology. I'm sure the intent was golden: to give us a basis for roleplaying the God-Kings, and to increase the verisimilitude of Mulhorand as a whole. Unfortunately, it failed to take the literalists into account. Enter WotC, and pretty soon Thoth is the Thoth from Deities & Demigods, and since there can be only one Thoth and that Thoth is a power not a weird quasi-deific "god-king" (whatever that is, amirite?) who just lives in Mulhorand... the god-kings are removed from Mulhorand and a huge chunk of the Old Empires' uniqueness is removed. Without the God-Kings, Mulhorand is just another nation, and in fact they're a dying nation, because there's certainly no excuse for a comeback now that we've emasculated them by removing their divine inspiration and power. I'm not sure if a retcon would have been better or worse, but it's a moot point because there are no God-Kings "now."
Using Horus-Re and Set and Osiris made Mulhorand too similar to Egypt. And that is why Mulhorand is no more. The problem isn't truly the fact that the God-Kings shared names with the Egyptian pantheon. Someone at WotC decided long ago that everything worshipped as a god anywhere in the Realms must be either a god or an aspect/vestige/whatever of a god. So they would probably have screwed up the God-Kings anyway. But there's a glimmer of hope that if the God-Kings had been given unique names, someone might have translated them as high-level mortals instead of full-fledged gods. Their residence in the Realms was a more dominant fact than their connection to deific power, so it's possible.
The result of that tweak would still be a dumbing-down because of someone at WotC being allergic to diversity, and someone else failing to quarantine that numbskull, but the God-Kings would still be in Mulhorand, and Mulhorand might likely still be in the Realms, and the possibility of the Third Empire of Mulhorand would remain open in all of our campaigns because canon would still be leaving room for it. As it should.
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
Claiming something is not creative because it is part of the real world and having a place in a fantasy world is not accurate. BY that count all those campaign worlds based on Earth History fail at creativity.
I'm not saying that having Quetzalcoatl in your setting is not okay. I'm saying give him a new name. A better example is Bactrian camels. They're named for a region in what is now Afghanistan; obviously they need a different name in the Realms.
With two exceptions, using Earth's names for stuff demonstrates a lack of creativity.
Earth in the Harry Potter books is basically the Earth we know, with one notable exception: magic. There are wizards and witches, who call everyone else muggles. There's a Ministry of Magic in England. Some phone booths are actually elevators. There are wands and spells, and wands and certain invocations actually have power. Everything else is the same. Fire hydrants, dogs, gawd-awful aunts, the whole bit. We can presume that there's a President in the United States, but fortunately we don't have to read about him.
That's one exception. If your game deliberately uses Earth for its foundations, then go ahead and use Earth's names for whatever you want. If not, then there's no creativity in copying.
The second exception is Aslan.
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
He also wanted Aslan from Narnia in the realms. Does that make him not creative? His elemental lords and beast lords are from Michael Moorcock. Lack of creativity?
Point of clarification: I'm saying that using Earth's names for things, when the game or setting isn't based on Earth, is not creative. I'm not saying that the person who does so isn't creative. If I've neglected the distinction, my bad.
Does it make Ed uncreative? No. Are the names uncreative? Yes.
Another clarification: I'm not demanding pure creativity in every aspect of the Realms. Ed has come up with zillions of awesome names, while I rely entirely too much on the Everchanging Book of Names program for naming NPCs and places in my own game.
I suspect that he used some names (Silvanus, Loviatar, etc) as placeholders... he was developing the Realms around his players' exploration, plus whatever occurred to him on a given day. It makes sense to have a Silvanus and a Loviatar in the Realms, so he put them in. I think it likely that he would have renamed them (as he did with other powers) when he found the time to develop them for the Realms, but those placeholders were still there when TSR acquired the setting so they became canon. Or maybe he just liked the sound of those names, and left them for that reason. I'm just talking about the names and the amount of Realms-specific development that hasn't been done on those deities, not about Ed.
In other cases (including Aslan) I imagine that he wanted to retain the connection with Earth. He seems to favor connections between our world and the Realms, and in Aslan's case it would be weird to put him in the Realms and then deliberately rename him.
|
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 30 Apr 2014 : 17:42:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
He has also said that a lot of those deities were placeholders.
Thankya Wooly; I figured, but I wasn't sure and didn't have a quote.  |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 30 Apr 2014 : 23:36:13
|
umm I did forget, it did list several home planes back in the 2e deity books........
still, alot of people would not know that they came from RW myth, unless they went and looked.
I don't know what the RW Mieliki's personality is.. all I do know is what of her realms one.
but also know, they have been in there for more than 20 years. Too late to change it nopw without killing them off and replacing them and well just look at 4e, how did that work out?? |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3746 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 01:39:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
I'm not saying that having Quetzalcoatl in your setting is not okay. I'm saying give him a new name. A better example is Bactrian camels. They're named for a region in what is now Afghanistan; obviously they need a different name in the Realms.
With two exceptions, using Earth's names for stuff demonstrates a lack of creativity.
-While I agree with a lot of what you said, this part is fairly easily reconciled as the deity simply wanting to retain its own name, and doesn't necessarily have to reflect a lack of creativity or anything else. Some immigrants change their names to better fit their new country (Ling Ye becomes Lindsey, Jeong becomes John, and so on), others don't. If the deity is bringing followers with it to Realmspace, it would make sense that it retains its name, as its followers are most familiar with that name. If it does not bring any with it, and all of its followers in Realmspace are new, there still isn't too much of an impetus to come up with a new brand new identity. A lack of a change, to me, is more about trying to emphasize the multispheric nature of deities and the connections to Earth, rather than a sudden lack of imagination or inability to come up with original names and terms. |
(A Tri-Partite Arcanist Who Has Forgotten More Than Most Will Ever Know)
Elves of Faerūn
Vol I- The Elves of Faerūn
Vol. III- Spells of the Elves
Vol. VI- Mechanical Compendium |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11987 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 02:16:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
Guess I'm in the minority here, I liked Mulhorand/Unther as they were to begin with. Not saying things can't be altered to make them more unique (which I support), I'm just saying that part of ruining the published Realms for me included ridding the setting of the gods that were established in the region to begin with. I will say that if Wizbro allows Ed to put his vision of the region into play they likely wouldn't regret the decision.
Guess I'm in the minority too, because I agree with you. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 03:36:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
If the deity is bringing followers with it to Realmspace, it would make sense that it retains its name, as its followers are most familiar with that name.
Fair enough, though bringing a bunch of Earthlings into Imaskar was one of a few gigantic problems with the story. If you accept the premise that Horus and company came to Toril because their worshipers preceded them, then you're adopting the Egyptian pantheon and that path has led WotC to destroy Mulhorand. If you take a side path and make the manifestations permanent residents of Toril, which they should be, and then it seems inevitable (to me) that they've been given Imaskari names.
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
If it does not bring any with it, and all of its followers in Realmspace are new, there still isn't too much of an impetus to come up with a new brand new identity.
I don't see it as an issue of the god coming up with a new identity. To me, it's something which the god is given by its new worshipers. The god either accepts or rejects it, and in doing so determines its fate in the setting.
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
A lack of a change, to me, is more about trying to emphasize the multispheric nature of deities and the connections to Earth, rather than a sudden lack of imagination or inability to come up with original names and terms.
This is a fair point, but taking into account the vast vocabulary of new words and expressions Ed has created for the Realms it seems to me that the people of Faerūn are consistent with human nature... we each interpret everything into our own cultural contexts. Even here on Earth, with monotheism being a nearly global phenomenon, we can't all agree on what that one god's name is, let alone agree on his/her/its nature, personality, or priorities.
Regardless of Quetzalcoatl being the same entity, with perhaps the same agenda in every world, he will have different names in different cultures. A Maztican culture on Toril might be similar enough to a Native American culture on Earth that the god manifests itself to both, but the differing languages of the tribes and their neighbors will result in pronouncing and spelling his name differently. If the god won't adapt to its followers, then it loses them... hence the long list of "minor" deities in Egyptian history which we're only discovering as we unearth journals and only-one-of-its-kind monuments.
And it's not a sudden thing. As sfdragon points out, it's been waiting for a solution for 20 years. Though I disagree about it being too late to change it now. If the 5e Campaign Guide says Jaana is Loviatar and Iineri is Mielikki, I'll be better-than-fine with that. (thanks EBoN and your neverending mediocre supply of similar names.) 4e pulled Zehir out of a hat. Renaming a couple of longstanding deities to give them some Realmsian distinction is much more welcome... especially if they're also given some personality in novels.
Just my take. Opinions obviously vary.
|
|
|
|
deserk
Learned Scribe
Norway
239 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 09:43:16
|
Personally I loved Unther and Mulhorand as they were, and their gods. They were both incredibly distinct cultures. And I never thought of them as neither Babylonia (or any other Mesopotamian state) or Egypt, but as countries with their own identity and history.
I kinda hate this idea that because something is derived from RW history that it somehow doesn't deserve a place in the Realms. FR is supposed to be a sandbox campaign setting with many different themes. |
Edited by - deserk on 01 May 2014 09:44:27 |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1879 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 13:05:18
|
| Why not just keep the official names as-is and provide alternative names for DMs to use if they want? Loviatar doesn't work for you? Use Jaana. I think, at this point (after 2+ decades), that changing the names wholesale would be a bad move. Some may like it, some may not mind it, but I think most would be put off by it. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 14:42:57
|
I loved the original 2e Mulhorand and Unther too. The Old Empires has been the center of my Realms gaming ever since 1990. I'm just stating, first, my guess that WotC will not bring the Egyptian pantheon back into the Realms; the reason for this guess is that they put a lot of work into getting rid of that pantheon. Then I went off on tangents.
I don't have anything against getting inspiration from RW stuff. I just think that importing it without changing it lowers the originality of the setting. It's lazy design, and in this particular case (the Egyptian pantheon) I think that it contributed to Mulhorand being removed from the Realms in 4e. Mulhorand itself could come back, if WotC decides to do that, but it's unlikely because what would they do with the new Deep Imaskari culture? The Egyptian pantheon, imo, is probably gone for good.
And I didn't mean to start a petition or anything for changing the names of the gods who didn't get renamed before the gray box was published. I'm just saying I wouldn't mind if they finally got around to naming and developing them for 5e.
Sorry if I've come off like I hate the Old Empires... that would be the furthest thing from the truth. I didn't even mean to get up on a soap box in this thread. Just seems to happen that way lately.
Edited for clarity. We still haven't seen what Ed originally intended for Mulhorand and Unther, but we do know that the published Old Empires is not the same as it is in his home game. |
Edited by - xaeyruudh on 01 May 2014 20:29:00 |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3746 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 18:26:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
It's lazy design, and in this particular case (the Egyptian pantheon) I think that it contributed to Mulhorand being removed from the Realms in 4e.
-Absolutely. More absurd is the fact that, really, it was the notion that Mulhorand was a complete rip-off (closer to say, Maztica) rather than an inspired pastiche. Plenty of words have been dedicated to coaxing out the real-world inspirations of other nations, both obvious and subtle. I can understand Mulhorand, Unther, and Chessenta (ignoring the more obvious wholesale continents of Kara-Tur, Zakhara, Maztica, and Osse) being under perhaps a little more scrutiny, because their inspirations were more overt- and in many cases literal and direct, as written into the lore- but outside of the deities and a few thematic elements, Mulhorand didn't exactly overlay on top of Ancient Egypt particularly cleanly. Maybe some are/were put off by those thematic elements more so than others, but enough had certainly been written about Mulhorand up until late 2008 or whenever it was to not only distinguish it from Egypt, but to make it an organic part of the world through trade, war, cultural osmosis, and so on, as opposed to something completely foreign and thematically clashing against everything else nearby just plopped on there for no reason. |
(A Tri-Partite Arcanist Who Has Forgotten More Than Most Will Ever Know)
Elves of Faerūn
Vol I- The Elves of Faerūn
Vol. III- Spells of the Elves
Vol. VI- Mechanical Compendium |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 19:41:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
Why not just keep the official names as-is and provide alternative names for DMs to use if they want? Loviatar doesn't work for you? Use Jaana. I think, at this point (after 2+ decades), that changing the names wholesale would be a bad move. Some may like it, some may not mind it, but I think most would be put off by it.
that goes without saying
but adding alt names would increase the word count and something else would get cut. |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
Edited by - sfdragon on 01 May 2014 19:53:52 |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 20:24:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
More absurd is the fact that, really, it was the notion that Mulhorand was a complete rip-off... but outside of the deities and a few thematic elements, Mulhorand didn't exactly overlay on top of Ancient Egypt particularly cleanly.
Exactly. Beyond having a pharaoh and being a theocracy, Mulhorandi society has little resemblance to Egypt. (At least, according to my understanding of Mulhorand and Egypt.) But the gods just had to be consolidated and unified. So... poof. 
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
an organic part of the world through trade, war, cultural osmosis, and so on, as opposed to something completely foreign and thematically clashing against everything else nearby just plopped on there for no reason.
...like Tymanther and Deep Imaskar, ayup. |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 20:35:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by sfdragon
adding alt names would increase the word count and something else would get cut.
Too true. Yea, I think adding optional names would be tacky. People would be asking "well, is this the deity's name or not?" And the answer would be "if you want it to be" and that wouldn't make anyone happy.
Either give them Realmsian names or don't, but either way they need some personality. Not because I want to see a bunch more novels about gods; I don't. But the personality of the gods shapes the personality and tenets of the church, and that is important for DMs and players.
|
|
|
|
Aldrick
Senior Scribe
909 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 23:10:32
|
I've stated in the past that in my Realms Thay conquered Mulhorand. In part because I wanted Thay to be larger and a more serious threat than portrayed in canon, but also because I didn't like the deities of Mulhorand.
I largely agree with some of the others who posted. Mulhorand isn't anywhere in the league of some place like Maztica or Kara-Tur. There isn't a lot about Mulhorand (or Unther) that made them complete rip-off's of their real world inspirations. However, using the deities names EXACTLY made things feel heavy handed.
It just made it feel like it didn't fit that well into the Realms, when compared to everything else. Had the names been changed, and a few very minor tweaks to the lore of Mulhorand and Unther been given - the problems wouldn't have existed.
It's a bit like having an entire culture that worships Zeus and the deities of Greek Mythology, or a culture that worships Odin and the deities of Norse Mythology. It doesn't mesh as well with the setting.
One of the reasons some of the other deities 'work' for the setting such as Loviatar, Mielikki, Oghma, and Ilmater is because they aren't as well known - in some cases to the point of being really obscure.
Tyr is somewhat borderline, but I think the name is generic enough that it could easily be passed off as just a similarly named but different deity. It's similar to knowing lots of people named John, Sam, or Adam. These names are common names that are popular. Similarly the same can be said for Tyr. There also aren't huge giant arrows pointing to his Norse origin, nor is there an attempt to make it clear that he was originally a Norse deity. (Though there are clear and subtle hints that he is indeed Tyr from Norse mythology.)
So, I think Tyr - as well as Tiamat and Bahamut - are good examples of deities that use names from real world mythologies, but differ enough to be distinct and unique in the setting.
The problem with the deities of Mulhorand is that they're straight up copies. There is no attempt to really integrate them into the Realms the same way Tyr, Tiamat, and Bahamut were integrated into the Realms.
Although, I do think some deities which are really well known - such as Zeus and Odin - don't fit in the Realms, no matter how much integration is done to them. I felt similarly about Tyche, which is why I like how she was split into Tymora and Beshaba. That's another example of a straight up real world port handled well in the Realms.
Here is the general rule of thumb I use when looking at interloper deities and cultures: Does it feel jarring? Does it seem to fit and mesh well with the setting?
If the answer to the first one is yes, or the second answer no - then something is wrong. Some tweaks and changes have to be made to smooth things over. Adding a Zeus or Odin would be jarring. They'd need name changes. Adding Tyr from Norse Mythology could be jarring, but by de-emphasizing his Norse origin and striving to really integrate him into the setting that jarring issue disappears. |
Edited by - Aldrick on 01 May 2014 23:14:15 |
|
|
|
Ateth Istarlin
Seeker
United Kingdom
80 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2014 : 23:24:40
|
| I hope that they do bring back both Mulhorand & Unther, as they are my favourite areas of the Realms. However, I don't mind if the gods are renamed as I have already done that myself. For instance, Horus-Re has been renamed Aten-Orus while Set has become Aphosis. |
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. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Do you think the Egyptian gods will come back?
