| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Wrigley
Senior Scribe
Czech Republic
605 Posts |
 Posted - 21 Mar 2016 : 18:35:12
|
Dear readers,
with the growth of the Realms through the years there has been a lot of material added due to the "need" to make big events. Lot of those were touching subject of religion and gods themselves especialy. There has and will be a lot of discussion about this as many do not like certain aspects of those changes and level of involvement of certain dieties.
This scroll is meant as a place for one such discussion and I hope this will help to calm the bad blood and find a new perspective on those issues.
I will also try to use this scroll to write down my ideas about planes, religion and gods as I have given it a lot of thoughts and it would be nice if somebody else could benefit from it. Those ideas somewhat differ from original Canon so please bear in mind that it is so.
|
|
|
Wrigley
Senior Scribe
Czech Republic
605 Posts |
Posted - 21 Mar 2016 : 18:56:27
|
One of the biggest issues is Time of Trouble that occured due to change of edition in D&D. There was a lot of bouncing gods on face of Faerun and they left a marks and scars everywhere they bounced (poing). This event also created some new gods (Cyric, Kelemvor) and respawned a few old ones (Mystra, Torm, Bane). Some even died during this cataclysm (Myrkul, Bhaal, Imbranduil).
So what has actualy happened to start this event? Gods were interested only in their power struggle neglecting mortals and using them only as pawns in their games. Overgod Ao (who was until then silent for milenias) finaly lost his temper with them when two new gods tried to steal his power for their own. He casted down all gods (except Helm for some reason) and made them mortal in their avatar form. Some of them made some use of it, most didn't. When Ao took them back he changed the rules of planes and from now on the gods were relying on power their followers gave them in worship so they will not neglect them any more. He accepted Mystra's nominated succesor (Midnight) in her place and gave power of four gods (Bane, Bhaal, Myrkul, Leira) to Cyric. Later Bane ressurected himself through his son Xvim and took back part of that power and even later Cyric lost another part of his power to Kelemvor, who become new god of death. |
 |
|
|
Wrigley
Senior Scribe
Czech Republic
605 Posts |
Posted - 21 Mar 2016 : 19:04:56
|
| Another big event was at beggining of Age of Humans (about 0DR). In those times there ended three major civilisations (Netheril, Jhaamdath, Raumathar/Narfell). Those falling gigants witnessed a heavy influence from gods and also their full scale conflict during Dawn Cataclism. There are many theories about what actualy transpired during this conflict and what can be included in it. The main theme was holy crusade of newly formed Triad (Tyr, Torm, Ilmater) around the Inner sea (or Sea of the Fallen stars). |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6369 Posts |
Posted - 21 Mar 2016 : 21:17:10
|
Well I have a different view and this and it doesn't include thegodswar because I'm among the group of fans that don't include that event in my realms.
So I'll start with what a god is. Either he is a semi humanoid creature amplified by the power of belief or he is a being of pure belief that has no form and can take whatever form he desires or that is dexsired by his servants.
There are no known events of the dawn cataclysm, only that it presaged the fall of myth drannor and heralded the creation of the faerunian pantheon. There are myths and stories about a goddess of luck pricking her finger on a thorn and being infected by rot before being met by a trio of deities and blasted into pieces.
My big question in all of this is why? I can't think of a credible reason that does not reduce beings of awesome power to pathetic humanoid creatures riddled with frailty and stupidity.
Instead I have to question if the myths and legends of faeruns past are only based on truth and twisted by thousands of years of the corruption of time like our own myths and legends. Did god really part the red sea or was it a well timed earthquake. Was the tale of Noah an act of divine retribution or the parting of the straits (then bridge) of gibraltar and the flooding into the Mediterranean sea. Did tyche prick her finger on a rose of an unknown power or did her church fracture in two that worshipped different aspects of the same ideal that grew into two separate churches and therefore two separate gods.
The events during the dawn cataclysm are similar myth and legend. No definable events with any visible effect on the world and an obviously deific version of anthropomorphism with human wants, desires, motivations etc placed upon gods to explain events people knew little about and had even less understanding of (the event being the formation of the faerunian pantheon).
The great conflagration was not such an event. Eltab came to faeru. Because he was bound. Kossuth came because he was summoned. Eltabs presence corrupted the eastern half of faerun until the present day (demoncysts). Kossuth's march burned narfell to the steppeland it is today along with half of kensten and much of the population and armies of both empires. The wants and actions of these two super powers is mysterious as you'd expect. Only Kossuth and eltab know why they interpreted their orders as they did and in many cases it defies explanation. It is not a deific soap opera of human frailty it is a testament to the incredible power and alien motives of two super beings (one of which definitely wasn't a god and the other is debatable).
Gods should be portrayed like the great conflagration and the death of sammaster. Anything else cheapens the idea and the setting as a whole.
|
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions Candlekeep Archive
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 1
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 2
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 3
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 4
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 5
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 6
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 7
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 8
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 9
Alternate Realms Site |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6369 Posts |
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6675 Posts |
Posted - 22 Mar 2016 : 02:31:21
|
Many moons ago, in a post on the Raumathari pantheon I posted the following:
The point you make about the gods is also an interesting one. I toyed a while back with mapping out the various pantheons of Faerun in a regional context and drawing comparisons and establishing cross-naming/worship of deities. That fell by the wayside when I decided upon my own unique take on FR deities, which is simply that the "individual" gods are akin to roper-like pseudopods from a central core of "godness" that is best and most simply described as Ao. Mortal worship draws out a line/thread of "godness" from this mass and gives it shape and purpose. It is the worship that shapes the god, not the god that shapes the worship. So someone in the middle of the Endless Wastes, praying for rain, might have that prayer answered. And along with that might come an insight into that deity and perhaps a name (that name being tied into something that the worshipper understands or has meaning to it/him/her) and an idea of what that "god" is all about.
This in my view better encapsulates the "god x was god y all the time" trope that has developed in the Realms of late (and which I am a huge fan of) and provides a better explanation as to why worshippers can be worshipping different "gods" but actually be worshipping the same "god". That same "god" is really a worship-driven manifestation of deific power and purpose, which is moulded and shaped by the worship that brings it into being. Over time, the deific "images" created by such worship will crystallize into what appear to be individual gods, so when people in an area pray for a good harvest, their worship is channeled to an entity that is best labelled as Chauntea. A thousand miles away, that same type of worship is channeled to the Earthmother. Yet another thousand miles away that worship is channeled into Bobo the Clown God. It varies and it depends.
So yes, I agree that the Raumathari religion may have worshipped "different gods" but when it's distilled down in my book, all worship of, for example nature stuff, is worship that draws upon the deific mass of godpower and godliness that is attuned to such worship and produces any number of deific responses (avatars, manifestations etc) that mortal worshippers attribute to "Chauntea", "the Earthmother" or "Bobo the Clown". As such, I've moved right away from anthropomorphising the gods. Those mortals who "become gods" (ala Midnight, Velsharoon and Kelemvor) aren't mortal as soon as they ascend. Their appearance, memories and experiences are taken over and used by the deific "god-mass". They are used as a conduit to project deific power and whilst retaining an outward appearance of independence (as all the individual gods do), they are nothing more than an outward skin for that conglomerate of deific, worshipper-fueled power.
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6369 Posts |
|
|
Wrigley
Senior Scribe
Czech Republic
605 Posts |
Posted - 22 Mar 2016 : 18:59:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Many moons ago, in a post on the Raumathari pantheon I posted the following:
The point you make about the gods is also an interesting one. I toyed a while back with mapping out the various pantheons of Faerun in a regional context and drawing comparisons and establishing cross-naming/worship of deities. That fell by the wayside when I decided upon my own unique take on FR deities, which is simply that the "individual" gods are akin to roper-like pseudopods from a central core of "godness" that is best and most simply described as Ao. Mortal worship draws out a line/thread of "godness" from this mass and gives it shape and purpose. It is the worship that shapes the god, not the god that shapes the worship. So someone in the middle of the Endless Wastes, praying for rain, might have that prayer answered. And along with that might come an insight into that deity and perhaps a name (that name being tied into something that the worshipper understands or has meaning to it/him/her) and an idea of what that "god" is all about.
This in my view better encapsulates the "god x was god y all the time" trope that has developed in the Realms of late (and which I am a huge fan of) and provides a better explanation as to why worshippers can be worshipping different "gods" but actually be worshipping the same "god". That same "god" is really a worship-driven manifestation of deific power and purpose, which is moulded and shaped by the worship that brings it into being. Over time, the deific "images" created by such worship will crystallize into what appear to be individual gods, so when people in an area pray for a good harvest, their worship is channeled to an entity that is best labelled as Chauntea. A thousand miles away, that same type of worship is channeled to the Earthmother. Yet another thousand miles away that worship is channeled into Bobo the Clown God. It varies and it depends.
So yes, I agree that the Raumathari religion may have worshipped "different gods" but when it's distilled down in my book, all worship of, for example nature stuff, is worship that draws upon the deific mass of godpower and godliness that is attuned to such worship and produces any number of deific responses (avatars, manifestations etc) that mortal worshippers attribute to "Chauntea", "the Earthmother" or "Bobo the Clown". As such, I've moved right away from anthropomorphising the gods. Those mortals who "become gods" (ala Midnight, Velsharoon and Kelemvor) aren't mortal as soon as they ascend. Their appearance, memories and experiences are taken over and used by the deific "god-mass". They are used as a conduit to project deific power and whilst retaining an outward appearance of independence (as all the individual gods do), they are nothing more than an outward skin for that conglomerate of deific, worshipper-fueled power.
-- George Krashos
How do you explain ToT if the gods are only part of Ao-pseudopod then why he has banished them to toril due to their wrong doings?
I think that all this come from idea that gods (or beings of similar power) have to be perfect, omnipotent.
There is a lot of material on Faerunian gods and one thing that is plain to see is that those gods are not perfect. They make mistakes, they can die and they seems to have a long learning curve (based on behaviour of new gods) - like milenia. Due to their more active role in lives of their worshipers (against RL gods) this is good because you as GM can more easily identify with them and make them behave not just as omnipotent giant space hamsters ;-) but as something you are able to believe in. Their main interaction that can be felt by most living beings is through their domains and clergy.
If you fall ill than you know that Talona is the source of this and that either her or some goody-do god can heal you through their cleric's spells. It doesn't matter so much that culprit who infected you was not Talonian fanatic but the malady itself is her doing. You can praise Lathander for giving you such a nice day full of sun because he is the sun. You can curse Cyric as you have been decieved as lies are his domain.
Their own physical activities are things of awe for mare mortals like those who witnessed battle of Torm with Bane over Tantras and this event itself made Tantras a center of Torm's worship. Most surviving pirates in Inner sea will spread fear of Umberlee's wrath as they have seen what that really mean.
Such events were not seen in last milenia almost anywhere (except in novels) and they have shaken the balance of faith globaly.
Most of the active gods in realms are quite young and I belive it is because they haven't yet been able to grasp full power of their position in planes and that they are still clinging to their former mortal life in single form. Older ones have more tendencies to stay behind a curtain and play things to their advantage in long term. It seems that those domains they got do change the new gods in a way but slowly.
It might seem similar to normal power groups in the shadows but their goals differ a lot and it is also a totaly different power level. I like this because it seemingly opens the door to continue a power growth of heroes but once you cross the border of Planes you are again on the beginning as a lowly pawn in a arena with quite different rules. |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 22 Mar 2016 : 21:59:35
|
One of the things I like about FR is that the gods are -alive-, meaning they truly exist, whether they interact directly with mortals or not. It is not just based on belief, like it is in our world. Now, the amount of followers (believers), a deity has can influence their power. Belief certainly plays a role, but it's not the sole basis of worship. Most Faerunian are polytheistic, and only some will have a patron deity.
I do agree that there have been times when deity involvement was a bit...much, and that sometimes they were too "human", which took away the mystery. That said, however, I actually kind of liked that they aren't perfect, and I also enjoyed the stories where the gods appear. The Avatar series had it's issues, yes, as did the whole ToT thing in general, but I still found it interesting (and I like Kelemvor as God of the dead).
I think the gods bring a richness to the setting, and I liked it better when the gods were separate (Hanali was Hanali and not the elven aspect of Sune, for example).
My passion for the Faerunian gods stems from my passion for the divine in general, and I don't mean that in a religious sense. I love stories about celestials and gods, and I believe the Realms would be bereft without them. I would like more of an explanation as to how the gods who died in 4e and were brought back in 5e other than just "Ao did it", but I am nevertheless happy they have returned. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
Edited by - CorellonsDevout on 22 Mar 2016 22:13:21 |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6369 Posts |
Posted - 23 Mar 2016 : 19:56:42
|
I will avoid the Time of Troubles inclusion in this discussion because that was an event purely for the novels. It did little to nothing to advance the realms from a gaming perspective (who has played a campaign during that event).
So lets get on with a non-canon discussion.
If god were real (and some people believe he is) and then you heard that your next door neighbour saw and spoke to him and was given a brand new television by god would you believe it?
So if on another planet where gods are real in a book about history that states the god Tempus battled Garagos and Targus on the plains of the Western Heartlands would you believe it?
Just because the gods are real doesn't mean people leave their natural scepticism behind when they hear tales of gods appearing and doing certain deeds. It is equally possibly that half the population think its true and half think its just muddled mythology peddled by a church to increase attendance during its ceremonies.
Using that as a basis I can propose an alternate explanation for the Time of Troubles (and will be using it if I ever finish my Alternate Dimensions campaign setting).
The alternate explanation is that it was business as usual for the realms except that a bunch of nutters started claiming they saw a god or that they killed a god who arrived in person on Toril (a god that was seemingly as weak as a kitten and able to be killed by any loony with a magic sword). Then other bards and tale spinners jumped on the band wagon and started reporting they saw gods and magical creatures and unexplained events (not isolated incidents in everyday Toril).
It all gets out of hand and soon every church is claiming their god arrived on Toril (not wanting to be left out and seen to not have a presence at this time of trouble) and every town is claiming to have been visited by a god.
Then the wizards not wanting to feel left out claim that magic went haywire for a time (again not an isolated event) and there were discharges of random magic all over the place, huge magic creatures appearing. Basically every evil mage used it as a cover to hide their nefarious activities.
So the Time of Troubles then becomes little more than a series of tall tales that acquired more interest than it should have and got picked up by cloak societies and rumour peddlers before spreading round the continent and getting turned into the medieval equivalent of a media frenzy.
That's how I would explain the time of troubles. The appearance of new gods is explained in the same way as the appearance of any gods. If enough people believe it happened then it actually happens. |
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions Candlekeep Archive
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 1
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 2
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 3
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 4
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 5
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 6
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 7
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 8
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 9
Alternate Realms Site |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 23 Mar 2016 : 20:30:13
|
I am not saying there aren't skeptics in the Realms, and I am not saying that Faerunians are going to take everything they hear as fact. Even a follower of Lathander would be skeptical if his neighbor told him Lathander joined him for tea (though Mystra has been known to do that haha).
My point was that, skeptical or not, the majority of Faerunians at least acknowledge the existence of the gods, whether they pay homage to them or not. Unlike the real world, where you either believe in a god or you don't, belief plays a different role in a world where belief doesn't solely determine the existence of the divine. It's a fact that they exist in the Realms. That doesn't mean mortals can't debate on what happened, be it the ToT or some other divine event (such as the more recent Sundering). The average Faerunian isn't going to understand what happened, and most don't try to understand the workings of the gods. So yes, there is room for multiple interpretations of the same event. But the gods are a part of the Realms, whether they act directly or indirectly. They have shaped events, and, in certain instances, usually between deities, been shaped by them.
We can't apply real world skepticism to a world where the existence of the divine is a fact. I'm not particularly religious, but I like that the gods are a part of the Realms, and it isn't a simple matter of belief or not belief. It's fact, whether the mortals fully understand those facts or not. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3807 Posts |
Posted - 23 Mar 2016 : 20:44:44
|
Personally, I would be very disappointed if the FR gods became fully belief-based. Their beauty is that they're not just greatly powerful alien entities, but that they are 'human-like', they have their own history, goals, motivations, personalities, bonds. They are deities, but they are also interesting characters (although I think that the greater their power, the less ''human'' they should be). To me, they are as interesting as their followers: I wouldn't like some RW-like approach, where the deity is ever distant and the followers do everything (besides, not only it strides with some FR events, it also strides with cultures directly influenced by--or that have particular bonds with--their deities, like the drow of most faiths).
The Realms do have a place for active deities: even in Ed's campaign, they have appeared on-stage, or interacted with the PCs through visions, or dreams. It's however obvious that this has been stretched far beyond reasonable limits by TSR, and then by WotC. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 23 Mar 2016 20:47:17 |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 23 Mar 2016 : 20:56:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Personally, I would be very disappointed if the FR gods became fully belief-based. Their beauty is that they're not just greatly powerful alien entities, but that they are 'human-like', they have their own history, goals, motivations, personalities, bonds. They are deities, but they are also interesting characters (although I think that the greater their power, the less ''human'' they should be). To me, they are as interesting as their followers: I wouldn't like some RW-like approach, where the deity is ever distant and the followers do everything (besides, not only it strides with some FR events, it also strides with cultures directly influenced by--or that have particular bonds with--their deities, like the drow of most faiths).
The Realms do have a place for active deities: even in Ed's campaign, they have appeared on-stage, or interacted with the PCs through visions, or dreams. It's however obvious that this has been stretched far beyond reasonable limits by TSR, and then by WotC.
Exactly. I fully agree with this. Religion isn't based solely on belief, but by the very presence of the deities, whether they appear "in person" or via some other means. And some deities are more likely to interact than others. Drow deities tend to be more actively involved, whereas some human ones aren't. Even an indirect interaction, such as a dream, the dreamer is going to have some sense that it is from a god, and won't just be like "that was a weird dream." It's more "Okay, Chauntea just sent me a message. What does it mean?" Granted, unless they were a direct follower of Chauntea, they may not realize it's from her at first, but they would eventually figure it out, especially if Chauntea was bent on getting their attention.
And to the last point, that's why I think there has to be a balance between too much interaction and not enough. I realize this is a delicate balance, to be sure, but it's possible. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
Edited by - CorellonsDevout on 23 Mar 2016 21:03:08 |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3807 Posts |
Posted - 23 Mar 2016 : 21:01:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
And to the last point, that's why I think there has to be a balance between too much interaction and not enough. I realize this is a delicate balance, to be sure, but it's possible.
Yes, but surely gods acting like buffoons, getting involved in love triangles, betting on chess games, or doing other weird stuff, is far off balance. It's just way too much Greek Mythology to me. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 23 Mar 2016 : 21:03:55
|
| Haha which is why I said it's a delicate balance |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Wrigley
Senior Scribe
Czech Republic
605 Posts |
Posted - 23 Mar 2016 : 21:53:17
|
I agree with the Greek mythology comparison - it is too much.
Also note that closest that average person come to the god is through witnessing spells of clergy. They are in almost every village and help people during their ordinary lives with illness and bad injuries. Even evil cleric can mend your broken leg...for a price of course. It is realy hard to not belive in existance of gods with that. Also gods send their minions (planar beings) on tasks to material plane and you can see them sometimes - a physical form messanger of the god. In case of Realms it is more of a question about veneration than believing. |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 23 Mar 2016 : 22:24:29
|
Right, and most Faerunians are polytheistic, and thus when they die, their soul goes to the deity who they are most aligned with (a soldiet for example might have a secret passion for gardening and nature, so he might go to Chauntea rather than Helm or Tyr, whether he expressly worshiped Chauntea or not). Most demihuman deities go to the realm of their respective pantheon, unless they have a patron who is outside that racial faith (such as if an elf worshiped Torm rather than one of the Seldarine).
Most mortals will pray to various deities based on circumstances. Tymora for luck, perhaps Ilmater to ease suffering. Sailors will make an offering to Umberlee for calm seas. It isn't just superstition that guides these actions. It's knowledge that whether they fully understand these deities or not, they know they exist. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Azuth
Senior Scribe
USA
404 Posts |
Posted - 24 Mar 2016 : 04:43:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
I will avoid the Time of Troubles inclusion in this discussion because that was an event purely for the novels. It did little to nothing to advance the realms from a gaming perspective (who has played a campaign during that event).
<snip>
Just because the gods are real doesn't mean people leave their natural scepticism behind when they hear tales of gods appearing and doing certain deeds. It is equally possibly that half the population think its true and half think its just muddled mythology peddled by a church to increase attendance during its ceremonies.
<snip>
So the Time of Troubles then becomes little more than a series of tall tales that acquired more interest than it should have and got picked up by cloak societies and rumour peddlers before spreading round the continent and getting turned into the medieval equivalent of a media frenzy.
Well, first of all, I played in a campaign during that event, and as a cleric it was a remarkable and fun-filled time. As a Priest of Bane, it was more so because aside from not knowing where my god had manifested, and not having any way to get to Zhentil Keep even if I had, our DM didn't tell us anything, just one night during the "we sleep" rolls he commented one of us who was on watch noticed the stars were very active. The next morning I prayed for spells and got nothing. It was extremely challenging, and extremely fun. It also wasn't "purely for the novels," but rather a narrative to explain the changes between the first and second edition of D&D. So, the answer to your first point is that at least one group played during that time.
Your second point would seem to proceed from a false assumption; As Ed has said, in the Realms, the gods are real, and this is not only not a subject for debate, but the divine manifest in such a way that one would be viewed as extremely bizarre and foolish not to believe in the gods. In Ed's first TSR-published novel (Spellfire) the gods are there and they are active. People may be skeptical about fantastical claims like someone purporting to be an avatar of a god, but we cannot look at the gods in a world where people throw fire and lightning and fly and become invisible and what not in the same way we view them in a world where we do not. Ed has also expounded (as CorellonsDevout has noted) that most people are polytheists. However, I disagree on the comments people have made about patron deities. Unlike most fantasy worlds, the Realms have a well-documented (in novels and sourcebooks) path for spirits after death, and this is known to the general populace of Toril as well. Believe and you go to your chosen heaven. Disbelieve or be false and your soul is damned for all eternity. Like or dislike the Avatar Series as you will, but in canonical Realms, meaning the novels and the sourcebooks, the gods let you know what happens to disbelievers. In short, I don't believe that in the Realms people have a "natural" skepticism. It would be entirely unnatural to be a skeptic of a fact, not matter how above the understanding of most mortals the actions of the gods may be.
Now, Ed has always said publically that the Realms are meant for us to interpret, not follow books. But, if you deviate too far from Ed's materials and vision, it ceases being the Forgotten Realms and starts being another home campaign setting. That's fine if that's what people want to play, but some of Ed's earliest musings were about Mystra and her power being spread in the Seven Sisters. Mirt and Durnan being the exception, Ed seems to have started with the gods and worked outward.
I think that, broadly speaking, the Avatar Series is a good attempt to explain why things changed in the world, and while Ao was originally a plot device, he also was meant to either represent the DM, or his "master" was meant to represent the DM. That being said, I have no use for He Who Shall Not Be Named, but the one responsible for Waterdeep, Crucible, and Beyond the High Road to name a few. His writings always seem to ruin perfectly good storylines.
But take away the gods and you lose some of the (subjectively) best Realms books written, from Drizzt and his patronage of Mielikki, to Liriel (as so excellently written by Elaine Cunningham) rejecting Lolth, to Cadderly and Deneir, and of course, Elminster and Mystra. In closing, there is a reason that almost all Realms novels have at least one central deity, and that's largely beause it's how Ed envisioned the Forgotten Realms working. One needn't like all of it (I certainly do not) to accept that it's fact insofar as the Realms goes, however. I'll close with the note that in Ed's "home" campaign they haven't yet reached the Time of Troubles, so for people who wish to avoid its events without needing to create a new world, just set your campaign pre ToT on the calendar by a decade or so. |
Azuth, the First Magister
Lord of All Spells
The greatest expression of creativity is through Art.
Offense can never be given, only taken. |
Edited by - Azuth on 24 Mar 2016 04:43:53 |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 24 Mar 2016 : 16:10:32
|
I agree with you, Azuth. Take away the gods, and you take away some of the best aspects of the Realms. You explained the fact of the existence of the gods better than I did.
Regarding the patron deities. I am not sure what you disagree with, so I apologize if I misunderstand. Some do have patron deities, and what I meant by that was they follow a specific god. Clerics and priests are the most likely candidates, but of course you have lay worshipers as well. These people follow the ways of a specific deity, but they acknowledge the existence of the others. And some, such as Qilue, have two patron deities.
As noted in Elminster's Forgotten Realms, since Faerun is a polytheistic, the soul of the departed will go to the god that best aligns with that person's ideology, unless they followed a specific deity in life, in which case that deity would take them in. As you pointed out, only the true disbelievers or the false get punished.
With demihuman deities, the souls go to their racial deities. Elves to Arvandor, dwarves to Dwarfhome, etc, unless they specifically worship a deity outside their racial pantheon. Many Faerunians pay homage to multiple deities (since they are polytheistic), but there all those who follow a certain deity.
Though ToT or not, people knew of the existence of the gods before then (they have been involved for centuries). I liked certain aspects of it. I found the story itself interesting. FR isn't the only fantasy series I have read that has a defined afterlife. In fact, quite a few fantasy novels have one, or at least it is implied. However, the divine in FR is very fleshed-out, and that's one of the things that I love about the Realms.
Annnnd I am rambling again.  |
Sweet water and light laughter |
Edited by - CorellonsDevout on 24 Mar 2016 19:55:56 |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6369 Posts |
Posted - 24 Mar 2016 : 20:35:59
|
I think you are misunderstanding my intentions. I am not advocating removing the gods. I try to not actually change any events in FR (otherwise the work becomes less useful to those that like the event).
What I'm advocating is removing the certainty and replacing it with ambiguity and intrigue.
So people pray to a god. Does he automatically know about it? Does he always answer? Does he even care? At the moment people seem to be under the impression that the answer is yes because that is how they are portrayed in the novels. If a priest prays to his god he receives an answer from that god. If a priest acts contrary to his deity's wishes then he is denied spells. Bane dies and that fact is communicated to all worshippers by his predecessor. Mystra dies and everyone knows about it, especially about her rebirth.
The thing is how can anyone be sure this was true or not. Take the death of Bane, Bhaal, and Myrkul for instance. Not everyone witnessed it, at least one of the deaths occurred in the wilderness. Yet people state with absolute certainty these three are dead. Did Cyric appear to every worshipper and have a nice chat with them and explain how it was. Did he send a creepy vision about their deaths and his ascension. How can anyone be sure Cyric sent the vision and not some other god ((or even a powerful being that is not a god because magic spells can send visions in dreams) who wanted the whole world to think the Dark Three were dead (if enough people believe it is so then it becomes true).
The loss of spells is something that everyone touts as being a consequence of a god dying or being displeased and yet would it not make more sense for another god to grant the spells to a priest in secret and send them visions to make them do as they wished (rather than the departed or dead god).
When a priest attempts to communicate with their deity what is the likelihood that the deity themselves answers the vision and not a lesser servant. How about if the god was too busy answering the prayers and questions of the other million people demanding their attention that day that another being (maybe even someone nefarious or with an alternate agenda) answered the communication to exploit the situation.
When a god appears or sends some manifestation how can anyone be certain which god sent it (does it come with a sign) or that a god even sent anything. Some manifestations are things like bird sign or a thunder clap or a strangely coloured lizard. All these things could happen naturally or be reproduced by magic. Even the appearance of an avatar could be faked by magic to fool an uneducated commoner. When the gods appeared during the time of troubles who would believe that the gods now walk the earth and even worse they are in weakened forms that can be easily killed with a sword.
The point I'm making is that all things quoted as fact and proof of godly interaction and one of the beautiful things of the realms could easily be a fake or another god taking advantage or even a simple misunderstanding or the delusions of an imaginative lunatic. That doesn't make the event not occur, it doesn't take away the interaction of the gods either because the common people believed it happened and in some cases it did happen (Lathander's avatar slaying Sammaster, the fight between Tiamat and Gilgeam, Jergal's Code of Reversion).
I can't claim to know Ed (although I've conversed a few times over email), but I've read about some of his games and I'm willing to bet that the claims of his interactions with gods etc are al part of his games. I'm certain he doesn't announce to his players that such and such a god has appeared. More likely the players hear a pub rumour or a whisper about some huge lion headed man battling a giant in armour in Tantras and Bob over their reckons one o them was Bane himself. A strange yet wise young woman appears for dinner and offers some sagely advice before departing mysteriously and suddenly. When a sage is queried later he smiles and nods saying "don't ye know Mystra often turns up for tea when 10 candles are lit on a table".
Are any of those events true or not. Who knows, its up for the player to decide. They could be the work of the gods or they could equally not. Stating either as fact just detracts from the mystery and the magic. |
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions Candlekeep Archive
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 1
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 2
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 3
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 4
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 5
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 6
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 7
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 8
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 9
Alternate Realms Site |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 24 Mar 2016 : 22:04:39
|
I understand this to a point. I remember Ed saying in one of the GenCon panels (I watched it on youtube), and they were discussing the upcoming Sundering and what was going on with the gods. I believe it was either GenCon 2013 or 2014. Anyway, Ed used am example Chauntea sending a vision (I think it was a pink rose or something, but anyway), and the players had to quote "*gasp* roleplay" to interpret it. So yes, there is room for interpretation, and it is up to the followers/players to try and decode this message. I'm not saying there is no room for mystery. In fact, there should be mystery, and, as I used in an earlier example, still using Chauntea, if she sends someone a vision, they likely aren't going to understand it right away, particularly if they aren't a direct follower. However, if Chauntea really wanted to get this person's attention, the visions would continue, and even if he didn't fully understand their meaning, he would eventually take a hint. Saying an event was a delusion or an act of magic -does- take away the interaction of the gods, even if the common people believed it happened, because then it wouldn't be an interaction, it would be an illusion. It doesn't matter if enough people believe an event happened. If it didn't happen, it didn't happen. And that's a difference between the real world and the Realms, where religion isn't solely based on belief. An uneducated commoner probably wouldn't know the facts of a certain event, so yes, that would leave room for ambiguity, but making it so ambiguous that it could be any god granting spells or prayers is similar to removing them from the Realms. If the broken arm is healed by a priest of Ilmater, but it was actually Mask, well, that also removes the point of having individual deities with individual portfolios (though some seem to be advocating for that approach). You may as well just have Ao do it all at that point, and make the Realms monotheistic, which again would detract from the richness and diversity of the setting. It wouldn't be the Realms anymore if deities were in fact just blobs without any real, actual individual essence.
I'm not saying gods have to come to tea and dine with their followers (unless you're Mystra), nor I am saying there aren't misunderstandings or different interpretations (look at the division within the church of Lathander during the Deliverance), and I am sure there are instances where a priest, likely of Bane or some evil deity, has exploited the ignorance of aforementioned uneducated commoner. However, the gods aren't so mysterious or so far removed that a granted prayer would be left up to debate as to which god granted it. The mystery comes when they have to figure out the meaning behind a sending. So, this message is from Chauntea. Now what?
Now, I will allow that during times of uncertainty, such as the ToT and the more recent Sundering, there were instances where it -was- unclear, especially as gods vied for each other's portfolio. However, with the return of the gods, it was mostly made clear, as things settled and quieted down. No, the gods don't appear to all their followers all the time, and I'm sure they are likely to send servitors of some sort (Lolth's Handmaidens, for example). That doesn't negate the actions of the god, or make it uncertain of which god is listening. A Handmaiden of Lolth is a servant of Lolth, not another deity. This falls under indirect interaction, though perhaps it is more direct than a simple vision, being as a creature of a deity is appearing, rather than a simple light in an otherwise dark room or a clap of thunder in a clear sky. As stated earlier, some deities are more actively involved with their followers than others, and the followers at least of those deities are going to know what kind of sendings their patron god favors (and that is why sourcebooks such as Demihuman Deities list the common sendings). Would someone in an isolated village know? Probably not, but again, if the god wanted to get their attention, they would do so. Players might be uncertain that it was Chauntea who sent the vision, so they have to figure it out—and figure out what it is Chauntea wants them to do, and they could misinterpret it—but if the message is from Chauntea, they would figure out it was from her, and not just any deity. If the DM wanted it to be a wizard sending the message and not Chauntea, well, then that is up to the DM, and you could say “that mysterious woman might have been Mystra, or maybe not”. But having a god interact with mortals doesn’t detract from mystery or magic. It’s a god interacting with mortals, and most mortals would have two reactions if Mystra sat down to tea with them. They would either be absolutely terrified, or be like, “I just had tea with Mystra! How awesome is that?!” (I do think a god appearing for tea might be a bit much of an interaction, but you –could- keep some of the mystery by having the god speak either in riddles or just being cryptic about what they want, so players still have to figure it out on their own—and thus, roleplay!)
When a deity dies, maybe not everyone knows about it right away, but their followers, particularly priests and clerics, tend to figure it out, and not just because their god is no longer granting prayers or spells. Even if another deity granted them spells for a time, I think a cleric would be able to tell the difference. Clerics, at least, are "attuned" to their deity, shall we say. Word of the either the death or rebirth of a deity would eventually spread, first among followers, and then to the rest of the populace. Mortals don't know everything that goes on with the deities. They aren't necessarily going to know how X god died, but they are eventually going to know X god is dead.
Okay, I have spent way too long on this response, and I apologize at how disorganized it is. I tend to ramble and write as thoughts come to me. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
Edited by - CorellonsDevout on 24 Mar 2016 22:18:54 |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3807 Posts |
Posted - 24 Mar 2016 : 22:22:36
|
I agree that gods acting directly, when appropriate, doesn't detract from the magic of the setting. On the contrary, it may give a feeling of ''awe'' to the players (or readers), if done well, and especially if the description of what the characters feel is immersive.
On the matter of uncertainty of communication between mortals and deities, gods don't usually manifest to mortals in person or act directly--they may be bound by divine rules, or prefer to not interfere with their followers' choices, or don't want their followers to have a clear picture of the truth, for whatever reason. This may lead people to not know who actually sent the ''message'' in a number of cases, but there are instances where they *feel* that it comes from a deity (even if they are not chosen, priests, or whatever). For example, Ed said that all drow constantly receive visions, dreams or emotions by Eilistraee, and that a certain point of their life, they feel her: they have mixed feelings about those visions, or don't understand them, but they feel that they come from Eilistraee, even if they have never heard of her and don't know her name (or even when they don't ''feel'' the message of the goddess).
There are also instances where speaking in riddles is counterproductive for the deity, and they may choose to manifest, even personally (for example if a deity is reborn, then it is their interest to let the news spread among mortals, so striking manifestations may appear. That was the case during the Sundering, when we know that some deities--like Mystra, Eilistraee or Vhaeraun--directly appeared, even in avatar form, to their people, for various purposes). |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 24 Mar 2016 22:31:46 |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 24 Mar 2016 : 22:44:46
|
That's why I said some deities are more active than others. It's true that a deity rarely actually appears, though they may send an avatar (which is likely as direct as you're going to get, and what I would consider the closest to "in person"). Eilistraee is a deity that is actively involved with her followers, whereas others are more distant. So it varies from deity to deity (and again, most followers are going to know the common sendings of their deity), and speaking in riddles was just an example a DM could use if they wanted to be "mysterious". Since deities -do- have distinct personalities, how they interact with mortals is going to reflect that.
And you bring up a good point about the Sundering, and that was what I was trying to imply that, even if not everyone knew what was going on at first, word spreads, first among followers, and then to the populace at large, because the deity--particularly the returned deities in the case of the Sundering--are going to let their faithful know what's up. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Azuth
Senior Scribe
USA
404 Posts |
Posted - 25 Mar 2016 : 03:45:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
I think you are misunderstanding my intentions. I am not advocating removing the gods. I try to not actually change any events in FR (otherwise the work becomes less useful to those that like the event).
What I'm advocating is removing the certainty and replacing it with ambiguity and intrigue.
<snip>
Are any of those events true or not. Who knows, its up for the player to decide. They could be the work of the gods or they could equally not. Stating either as fact just detracts from the mystery and the magic.
I think I'm having trouble truly deciphering what you are advocating, dazzlerdal. There are two viewpoints: the player characters and the people playing them. To the player characters, the gods are real, although they may not necessarily know when dealing with a god or not. As I said in an earlier post about my dislike for He Who Shall Not Be Named, in Crucible Talos not only manifests as Mystra to a follower, but Mystra is so preoccupied trying to save Adon (if memory serves) that she hears her follower's prayer, but sends a falling star as a sign that is misinterpreted by her follower. Similarly, as a DM, when a player rolls a natural 1, they player knows he rolled a one, but his character may say, "Beshaba was eyeing me when I swung at you" to his opponent. Equally, his opponent might say, "Tymora favors me." The point is: in the Realms people can claim a god does or doesn't favor him, is or isn't acting on his behalf, or does or does not care about mortals. That's all part of the magic of role playing in general, and in the Realms in particular. I don't think that anybody in Candlekeep would deny the fun of role playing characters.
Where I get lost is that you want more "mystery and magic," and while that exists to varying degrees in each campaign, it is also up to the DM on how to play the pantheon. I've had some characters absolutely insist on walking into a dragon's layer, and since I didn't want to kill my party, I sent Tyr and Helm as ghostly avatars warning the paladin in the party that certain doom lay down the path ahead, and that "in the chamber beyond, even our power cannot nor aid you." The paladin proceeded to argue with the party that they should turn back (my goal as a DM) but the party had people who (as you implied in your posts) claimed it wasn't really TWO deities manifesting and it HAD to be a trick. The cleric in the party (Lathander if memory serves - it was almost a decade ago) was the next to switch to the "we really shouldn't go in there" side of the argument. Ultimately, two party members did decide to go in, and only one came out. But at no point in any of this did any of the characters disbelieve in the existence of the gods.
A point to CorellonsDevout that I think is worth noting: the sourcebooks are rather specific when it comes to Patron Deities. A person must choose his or her patron in life and be true to that patron's overall portfolio. Jim Lowder wrote an excellent example with Gwydion in Prince of Lies, wherein a mortal is deceived by another god (who again, manifests as another deity) but because he never actually prayed to any of the gods truly in life, he was deemed one of The False. Since this is pre-Kelemvor, Cyric did what he always did, but to the larger point, while Ed has said it is expected all mortals be polytheistic, they still have a "declared" patron. It can be tossing a couple of coppers in an altar, or even building an altar in one's home, or creating a holy circle to Chauntea or Silvanus or Eldath (even if not a druid or cleric) but a mortal still "picks" which version of heaven he or she wants.
And to the larger point that has been debated: gods can and do grant the prayers of fallen deities. Cyric did so (and it was stated as such in Adventures) for the former worshippers of Bane, Bhaal, and Myrkul. They didn't have to pray to him, they prayed to his portfolio and he granted them spells. Even the gods didn't know what was up in Prince of Lies, as they knew that someone was answering the prayers of Leira, but not whom. In that very book, you have characters who desperately want the attention of the gods (Fzoul) and those who want nothing more than the gods to leave them alone (Rinda and to some extent, Gwydion). But this backs up the point that just because someone prays to Leira, that doesn't mean she's around to hear the prayers, and mortals wouldn't (and didn't) know that Leira had been offed. So, I think there's plenty of precedent for mystery in the printed materials to back up both that the gods exist and that there's a lot of ambiguity in both the divine and mortal worlds with respect to them and their goings on.
Returning to the main point of this scroll, however: I don't believe that there has been a lot of "added material" over the years. Rather, I think that there have been a lot of stories about the gods over the years, with a very-small number of deities being added/replaced/returned. I dislike this "Ao said so" approach of 5E as well as others, because there can only be one deity of the dead at a time, yet Myrkul and Kelemvor are both apparently in dominion over it. Cyric is still around (but imprisoned for 10,000 years) and Bhaal is back, so who is the Lord of Murder? Bane has apparently morphed into the god of hatred, rather than the more wicked strife, hatred, and tyranny of his 2E self pre-"death." However, Tyche hasn't come back (I don't believe) since it would be weird to be present and be split in twain simultaneously. So, while we have a lot of material covering the gods, I much prefer it to this set of conflicting deities we have right now. |
Azuth, the First Magister
Lord of All Spells
The greatest expression of creativity is through Art.
Offense can never be given, only taken. |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3807 Posts |
Posted - 25 Mar 2016 : 04:21:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azuth
Returning to the main point of this scroll, however: I don't believe that there has been a lot of "added material" over the years. Rather, I think that there have been a lot of stories about the gods over the years, with a very-small number of deities being added/replaced/returned. I dislike this "Ao said so" approach of 5E as well as others, because there can only be one deity of the dead at a time, yet Myrkul and Kelemvor are both apparently in dominion over it. Cyric is still around (but imprisoned for 10,000 years) and Bhaal is back, so who is the Lord of Murder? Bane has apparently morphed into the god of hatred, rather than the more wicked strife, hatred, and tyranny of his 2E self pre-"death." However, Tyche hasn't come back (I don't believe) since it would be weird to be present and be split in twain simultaneously. So, while we have a lot of material covering the gods, I much prefer it to this set of conflicting deities we have right now.
5e deals with it by splitting the portfolios. Cyric has become the god of lies, Leira the goddess of illusions, Myrkul is the god of death, Kelemvor of the dead and Bhaal of murder. Bane still is the god of tyranny. And, going by the Sword Coast Guide, Tyche hasn't come back. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
|
|
|
Azuth
Senior Scribe
USA
404 Posts |
Posted - 25 Mar 2016 : 07:16:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
5e deals with it by splitting the portfolios. Cyric has become the god of lies, Leira the goddess of illusions, Myrkul is the god of death, Kelemvor of the dead and Bhaal of murder. Bane still is the god of tyranny. And, going by the Sword Coast Guide, Tyche hasn't come back.
Myrkul is the act of dying, but Bhaal is the Lord of Murder? Leira was the goddess of intrigue, which Mask coveted greatly. I know that SCAG doesn't say Tyche has come back, but given as there's no rationale provided as to why gods are alive (mine own namesake is listed as quite full of verve yet in Erin Evans books, that's hardly the case) it seems like there isn't really any canon anymore. There are the books, and there's the contracted-out "sourcebook" stamped with the D&D logo that sort-of-but-not-really serves as a partial 5E campaign guide for a very-small section of the Realms. If it were a first-edition print without four editions of history, I'd buy into its messages, but it contradicts what Ed and Wizards has printed in novels, without so much as a "by your leave" explanation.
To your larger point, though, (I think) I can't imagine why Kelemvor and Myrkul would share a domain in any way. Kelemvor hates undead and Myrkul promotes it. As I said before: player characters aren't supposed to know what's happening in the celestial realms at all times, but players playing the characters should have an idea, and the DM should have a reliable, reasonable sourcebook (dare I say, "official?") letting us know at least in a paragraph or three as to how the situation came to be. I've read SCAG three times now and I can't find anything that explains how we got from the 4E pantheon to the 5E pantheon in any reasonable detail or explanation. I didn't like the 4E pantheon, but how does a DM reasonably say to characters, "suddenly, there are a whole lot of gods that your grandparents worshipped in the heavens, and the ones you've been worshipping, well, they're not around any more." The Sundering spoke to the part of a few gods returning, but nothing about the drivel they gave us in 4E disappearing. I had high hopes that SCAG would illuminate us as to what's up in the heavens, but it only confused my players (and me) more. |
Azuth, the First Magister
Lord of All Spells
The greatest expression of creativity is through Art.
Offense can never be given, only taken. |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6369 Posts |
|
|
Wrigley
Senior Scribe
Czech Republic
605 Posts |
Posted - 25 Mar 2016 : 11:41:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
I'm more about trying to resolve the growing gap between the two camps of FR fans that exists for almost every aspect of the forgotten realms; those who like the tot and those who don't, those who like x and those who don't. It serves only to split the community further with every edition.
It also stifles creativity when those who like it or don't propose an idea that deviates slightly from the established or seeks to reinterpret it then the canon junkies throw the holy book of canon at them.
I'm saying that as fans of the novels or the sourcebooks don't interpret it as black and white, anything is possible within the realms of creativity as long as the events as largely the same. That way those that like the tot can keep it as is and portray to their audience as an epic event of munchkin versus munchkin, and those that don't like it can portray it as a series of tall tales and rumours of everyday occurrences that got swept up in a media frenzy.
I agree it is sad that all those changes between editions create strife in FR community as everyone is trying to make sense of it differently and most of us do use only parts of new canon realms. It is most visible in discussions here as in almost any topic starts to branch out with every answer added. The canon should serve as a common ground but now it is the opposite. My hopes for 5e was that it will heal this wound but from what I hear it make it even more confusing and open.
As there are many interpretation of Realms the best aproach I can see is to embrace this variety and use it as a source of inspiration instead of strife. No version is better than other as long as it is fun to play. This also means that there will be no united vision of how realms should look like as you Dazzlerdal and others have tried to make. I salute your motivation and I like your modul-like aproach but there will always be the one who do not like it. |
|
|
|
Wrigley
Senior Scribe
Czech Republic
605 Posts |
Posted - 25 Mar 2016 : 11:52:11
|
Could you describe what do you hate about Cyric as he seems to be a thorn for many.
Official solution seems to be banishing him as marketing toll found fans don't like him... But that is exactly what Cyric is about - a villan diety. He should be hated but this hate should be embraced by players and DM's into the game where he will be utterly hated by paladin of Torm who will do his best to thwart his plans for the region. He is mad and evil but it is totaly correct for chaotic evil god of strife, lies and murder. He is amassing a large following in mosters department (entire clans of orcs and goblins and also a lot of inteligent beasts) and also he is rebuilding murderer and assasin guilds that went down with death of Bhaal. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36837 Posts |
Posted - 25 Mar 2016 : 13:02:45
|
I, personally, hate Cyric because I think he's a weak and pathetic git. He had the chance to be a decent person, but he chose expediency over decency. He didn't become a bad guy out of ambition or anything; it was just easier than being a good guy.
He has no personal strength. I can't respect someone like that.
And then there's everything he's done since then. He obsessed over Kelemvor, as a way to get back at Midnight for Lurue only knows what reason. He came up with a nifty if way megalomaniacal plot, and drove himself crazy by being the only one to fall for it. And he's done a lot of little stuff that seems to be being evil for the sake of being evil.
Cyric is a cariacature. He's a mustache-twirling wannabe villain. |
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!  |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3807 Posts |
Posted - 25 Mar 2016 : 13:56:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azuth
Myrkul is the act of dying, but Bhaal is the Lord of Murder? Leira was the goddess of intrigue, which Mask coveted greatly. I know that SCAG doesn't say Tyche has come back, but given as there's no rationale provided as to why gods are alive (mine own namesake is listed as quite full of verve yet in Erin Evans books, that's hardly the case) it seems like there isn't really any canon anymore. There are the books, and there's the contracted-out "sourcebook" stamped with the D&D logo that sort-of-but-not-really serves as a partial 5E campaign guide for a very-small section of the Realms. If it were a first-edition print without four editions of history, I'd buy into its messages, but it contradicts what Ed and Wizards has printed in novels, without so much as a "by your leave" explanation.
To your larger point, though, (I think) I can't imagine why Kelemvor and Myrkul would share a domain in any way. Kelemvor hates undead and Myrkul promotes it. As I said before: player characters aren't supposed to know what's happening in the celestial realms at all times, but players playing the characters should have an idea, and the DM should have a reliable, reasonable sourcebook (dare I say, "official?") letting us know at least in a paragraph or three as to how the situation came to be. I've read SCAG three times now and I can't find anything that explains how we got from the 4E pantheon to the 5E pantheon in any reasonable detail or explanation. I didn't like the 4E pantheon, but how does a DM reasonably say to characters, "suddenly, there are a whole lot of gods that your grandparents worshipped in the heavens, and the ones you've been worshipping, well, they're not around any more." The Sundering spoke to the part of a few gods returning, but nothing about the drivel they gave us in 4E disappearing. I had high hopes that SCAG would illuminate us as to what's up in the heavens, but it only confused my players (and me) more.
I agree with you that the ''explanation'' provided is really disappointing. It basically is: ''the Sundering happens, and then gods and nations are back. Here is the current state'' (although the 4e gods are still around, this time WotC only added rather than taking away).
However, regarding your points. Azuth is listed as currently active because the SCAG describes the status quo of the FR in 1491 DR (or so), while Erin's book are dealing with his return, among the other things (and IIRC in one of Erin's books, Azuth is hinted as being alive, although struggling to free himself from Asmodeus).
As for the portfolios, the explanation for their re-distribution is handwaved away with the Sundering and Ao (yet again). I agree that the splitting is rather weird, but it is a way to bring back mutliple potentially overlapping deities. Bhaal's portfolio seems to be a part of Myrkul's, though, but you could see him as a god of assassins. I know that it's not satisfying (and things like this are the reason why there's a lot of the FR history that I completely ignore), but if you really care about staying close to canon, then that's what WotC said.
There are things, like Dove being alive, which do indeed contradict what has happened in the novels, and they are too handwaved away.
|
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 25 Mar 2016 13:58:55 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Religion and dieties of FR
