TheRPGSite

Greetings!

In thinking about how all of the various polytheistic religions in D&D are often presented as all playing nice with each other--especially in the Forgotten Realms--but others, as well, I was thinking that being inspired from real-world history makes a campaign significantly more interesting and dynamic. Far from being Happy Rainbow Barney Sweetness, history adds deeper elements and a vivid dynamic that stands in stark contrast.

The Roman Empire, for example, was an empire that embraced a polytheistic, Pagan religion. While the Romans are often celebrated and admired for their religious tolerance--the truth is distinctly, and in my view, harshly different.

In the Roman conquest of Gaul, Celtic rebellions throughout Gaul were consistently sponsored by and inspired by Druids. The deeper reason for Rome's invasion and conquest of Britain was to crush this outstanding opposition which was fueling the resistance to Rome in Gaul. Once in Britain, the Romans realized that the seat of Druidic power was on the Isle of Man. Rome sent legions there to burn all of the sacred groves down, and kill all of the Druid priests. Druidism was outlawed throughout the Roman Empire. Worshippers of the Celtic Paganism were routinely hunted down, and crucified.

Rome and Judea. While at first tolerant of Judeaism, the Roman Empire eventually sanctioned and outlawed Judaism as well. The Romans spent several years crushing Jewish rebellions in Judea, and laying siege to the city of Jerusalem, where upon the city's fall, the Romans are believed to have slaughtered upwards of 1,500,000 people. The city was destroyed, and purposely crushed and torn down. The Temple was taken apart, stone by stone, with even the floor stones being burned so hot so that the gold and silver lining and inlays would melt. The Jews were forbidden from even living in Judea, which is how the Jewish Diaspora began. All of the Jewish holy artifacts were carried off to Rome, as depicted in the Arch of Titus.

The Roman Empire outlawed Christianity. Thousands, tens of thousands of Christians were martyed. They were routinely fed to the lions in the Arena, and forced to be publicly tortured for the amusement of the vast crowds in the Coliseum. Many Christians were crucified, beheaded, tortured, and soaked in oil, and set on fire to burn to death. Roman agents and spies hunted Christian groups down, and had them placed under arrest and imprisoned, whereupon they were soon tortured and executed, in public, for all to see.

At various times, other religions were also outlawed, and persecuted throughout the Roman Empire. There were occasions where in the city of Rome itself, lists of people known to be worshippers and members of various outlawed cults were declared to be heretics and Enemies of the State, and hunted down in the thousands, where they were tortured and executed. They, as well as many of their families as well. Of course, all of their lands, properties, and any wealth, was also siezed by the government.

So, a D&D campaign featuring the typical polytheistic system of religions does not have to be a Happy Rainbow Barney Land. Real world history provides plenty of inspiration where polytheistic, Pagan religions were definitely not tolerant and accepting at all.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1073682Greetings!

In thinking about how all of the various polytheistic religions in D&D are often presented as all playing nice with each other--especially in the Forgotten Realms--but others, as well, I was thinking that being inspired from real-world history makes a campaign significantly more interesting and dynamic. Far from being Happy Rainbow Barney Sweetness, history adds deeper elements and a vivid dynamic that stands in stark contrast.

The Roman Empire, for example, was an empire that embraced a polytheistic, Pagan religion. While the Romans are often celebrated and admired for their religious tolerance--the truth is distinctly, and in my view, harshly different.

In the Roman conquest of Gaul, Celtic rebellions throughout Gaul were consistently sponsored by and inspired by Druids. The deeper reason for Rome's invasion and conquest of Britain was to crush this outstanding opposition which was fueling the resistance to Rome in Gaul. Once in Britain, the Romans realized that the seat of Druidic power was on the Isle of Man. Rome sent legions there to burn all of the sacred groves down, and kill all of the Druid priests. Druidism was outlawed throughout the Roman Empire. Worshippers of the Celtic Paganism were routinely hunted down, and crucified.

Rome and Judea. While at first tolerant of Judeaism, the Roman Empire eventually sanctioned and outlawed Judaism as well. The Romans spent several years crushing Jewish rebellions in Judea, and laying siege to the city of Jerusalem, where upon the city's fall, the Romans are believed to have slaughtered upwards of 1,500,000 people. The city was destroyed, and purposely crushed and torn down. The Temple was taken apart, stone by stone, with even the floor stones being burned so hot so that the gold and silver lining and inlays would melt. The Jews were forbidden from even living in Judea, which is how the Jewish Diaspora began. All of the Jewish holy artifacts were carried off to Rome, as depicted in the Arch of Titus.

The Roman Empire outlawed Christianity. Thousands, tens of thousands of Christians were martyed. They were routinely fed to the lions in the Arena, and forced to be publicly tortured for the amusement of the vast crowds in the Coliseum. Many Christians were crucified, beheaded, tortured, and soaked in oil, and set on fire to burn to death. Roman agents and spies hunted Christian groups down, and had them placed under arrest and imprisoned, whereupon they were soon tortured and executed, in public, for all to see.

At various times, other religions were also outlawed, and persecuted throughout the Roman Empire. There were occasions where in the city of Rome itself, lists of people known to be worshippers and members of various outlawed cults were declared to be heretics and Enemies of the State, and hunted down in the thousands, where they were tortured and executed. They, as well as many of their families as well. Of course, all of their lands, properties, and any wealth, was also siezed by the government.

So, a D&D campaign featuring the typical polytheistic system of religions does not have to be a Happy Rainbow Barney Land. Real world history provides plenty of inspiration where polytheistic, Pagan religions were definitely not tolerant and accepting at all.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Yeah, see my read is the opposite of yours. The empire was tolerant of other tolerant religions. Syncretism was always an option for them if it was an option for you.

Where it had a problem was with intolerant my-way-or-the-highway religions, especially monotheistic ones like Judaism and Christianity

Quote from: Zirunel;1073688Yeah, see my read is the opposite of yours. The empire was tolerant of other tolerant religions. Syncretism was always an option for them if it was an option for you.

Where it had a problem was with intolerant my-way-or-the-highway religions, especially monotheistic ones like Judaism and Christianity

Hey there! Well, there was also the Druidic religion of the Pagan Celts--they weren't monotheistic. And, there were other Pagan religions that were persecuted as well by the Romans, for example, that were not monotheistic.

Of course, there's also examples of non-monotheistic religions being persecuted by other Pagans as well, such as the Kurgans persecuting religions of Old Europe, and strife of native Goddess-centered religions on Crete persecuting male-focused religious cults from the mainland of Greece, around 1200 BC.

Then, of course, I didn't detail, but there has been plenty of religious strife and persecution in India for example, between various religions and flavours of Hinduism, Buddism, Jainism, and other Pagan religions there. They have dozens, hundreds even, through the centuries. All before any arrival of Christianity, Judeaism, or Islam.

Interesting stuff. Lots of different ingredients that can be used to make religious factions and religious life different in the campaign.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Of course the big difference in D&D is that the gods are actually real and there are worshipers with actual magical powers.

So using actual history where they aren't and didn't doesn't make much sense.

Quote from: SHARK;1073690Well, there was also the Druidic religion of the Pagan Celts--they weren't monotheistic. And, there were other Pagan religions that were persecuted as well by the Romans, for example, that were not monotheistic.

It's not my field, but my impression is that the Romans didn't care about the religion of the pagan Celts as long as they respected the political authority of Rome. There was essentially no attempt to force the Celts to worship Jupiter and other Roman gods. As long as the Celts cooperated with the legions and paid their taxes, they were free to worship whomever they pleased.

Quote from: SHARK;1073690Of course, there's also examples of non-monotheistic religions being persecuted by other Pagans as well, such as the Kurgans persecuting religions of Old Europe, and strife of native Goddess-centered religions on Crete persecuting male-focused religious cults from the mainland of Greece, around 1200 BC.

Then, of course, I didn't detail, but there has been plenty of religious strife and persecution in India for example, between various religions and flavours of Hinduism, Buddism, Jainism, and other Pagan religions there. They have dozens, hundreds even, through the centuries. All before any arrival of Christianity, Judeaism, or Islam.

I don't know about the Kurgans - but while there was some tension, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism got along much much better than the Abrahamic religions. There's certainly been some oppression and bias, but nothing even close to the religious wars that raged across Europe and the Middle East.

China similarly had a mix of different beliefs - Taoism, Confucianism, and Buddhism - but they would often all three be practiced alongside each other. Again, there was tension - particularly over Buddhist monasteries as social/political entities - but not the same sort of conflict as in Abrahamic religions. It's not that China is a happy rainbow Barney land - but just that the conflicts that arose were not directly over religion, but more over other issues.


Of course, in a world with real gods and objective good/evil, the religious practice is going to be quite different.

Quote from: jhkim;1073716It's not my field, but my impression is that the Romans didn't care about the religion of the pagan Celts as long as they respected the political authority of Rome. There was essentially no attempt to force the Celts to worship Jupiter and other Roman gods. As long as the Celts cooperated with the legions and paid their taxes, they were free to worship whomever they pleased.

Pretty much this. The Roman purge of the Druids was not against Celtic Paganism but specifically the Druid social caste.

Celtic society was very clannish and tribal, and the Druids existed outside, above, and beyond that clannish structure. The Druids as a caste were a powerful influence on Celtic society, both in a religious and in a socio-political sense, and were the closest thing to a unifying force among the Celts, which was why the Druids specifically posed a threat to the Roman state.

Rome never outlawed the practice of Celtic Paganism (in some cases, there was even a fusion of Roman and Celtic beliefs, deities such as Epona, Sulis, and Silvanus are evidence of this) but instead outlawed the Druids as a distinct social and political caste.

Now, monotheistic religious such as Judaism and Christianity were definitely outlawed and persecuted in Pagan Rome because of their exclusively monotheistic outlook.

That and their direct conflict with the Roman cultural and political norms of the time.

That being said, SHARK has some good points of his own and I am inclined to agree with him that in D&D, there would very likely be conflicts between various religious orders, even in a polytheistic world.

Quote from: jhkim;1073716It's not my field, but my impression is that the Romans didn't care about the religion of the pagan Celts as long as they respected the political authority of Rome. There was essentially no attempt to force the Celts to worship Jupiter and other Roman gods. As long as the Celts cooperated with the legions and paid their taxes, they were free to worship whomever they pleased.



I don't know about the Kurgans - but while there was some tension, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism got along much much better than the Abrahamic religions. There's certainly been some oppression and bias, but nothing even close to the religious wars that raged across Europe and the Middle East.

China similarly had a mix of different beliefs - Taoism, Confucianism, and Buddhism - but they would often all three be practiced alongside each other. Again, there was tension - particularly over Buddhist monasteries as social/political entities - but not the same sort of conflict as in Abrahamic religions. It's not that China is a happy rainbow Barney land - but just that the conflicts that arose were not directly over religion, but more over other issues.


Of course, in a world with real gods and objective good/evil, the religious practice is going to be quite different.

Greetings!

Yep, the Pagan Romans were tolerant towards many other religions. I gave some examples where even in a tolerant Pagan society, such a society was not as tolerant as we might think, or that a Happy Rainbow Barney Land of D&D, specifically, would suggest.

Same thing with India, the Minoans, Old Europe and the Kurgans, as well as Asia, like you mentioned. For a variety of different reasons, there was not a Barney Land tolerance for all religions. Extending from that, in D&D, ala Forgotten Realms, we have dozens of religions--even the otherwise "Good" and "Nuetral" ones, as opposed to Evil religions, and yet with such enormous variety, there is relatively little conflict.

I tend to think that it is more likely that there would be conflict. As I mentioned, even without monotheism, there are a variety of conflicts that have gone on in otherwise polytheistic, Pagan religions in our own history.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Doc Sammy;1073719Pretty much this. The Roman purge of the Druids was not against Celtic Paganism but specifically the Druid social caste.

Celtic society was very clannish and tribal, and the Druids existed outside, above, and beyond that clannish structure. The Druids as a caste were a powerful influence on Celtic society, both in a religious and in a socio-political sense, and were the closest thing to a unifying force among the Celts, which was why the Druids specifically posed a threat to the Roman state.

Rome never outlawed the practice of Celtic Paganism (in some cases, there was even a fusion of Roman and Celtic beliefs, deities such as Epona, Sulis, and Silvanus are evidence of this) but instead outlawed the Druids as a distinct social and political caste.

Now, monotheistic religious such as Judaism and Christianity were definitely outlawed and persecuted in Pagan Rome because of their exclusively monotheistic outlook.

That and their direct conflict with the Roman cultural and political norms of the time.

That being said, SHARK has some good points of his own and I am inclined to agree with him that in D&D, there would very likely be conflicts between various religious orders, even in a polytheistic world.

Greetings!

Precisely, Sammy!

With the Romans and Celtic Paganism, yeah, the Romans were tolerant. They were tolerant as long as we slaughter all of your Druid priests, burn down all of your Sacred Groves, and indeed--they outlawed any training or institution of new Druid priests. Druids in Gaul for example, years *after* the Roman conquest under Ceasar, were hunted down and crucified. Later on, the Roman legions wiped out the Druids in Britain and the Isle of Man.

I've read historians that have commented that while Romans adopted Celtic gods, and syncretism proceeded for all of the Celts under Rome--the Romans essentially exterminated the Celtic religion. Before the Romans, Celtic Paganism was vibrant, growing, and distinctive.

After the Romans, Celtic Paganism was a shattered husk of what it was *before*. :)

Good examples all though of how polytheistic religions would likely be far more complex and nuanced--and not always tolerant--like what is depicted in Happy Rainbow Barney Land. LOL

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1073724Greetings!

Precisely, Sammy!

With the Romans and Celtic Paganism, yeah, the Romans were tolerant. They were tolerant as long as we slaughter all of your Druid priests, burn down all of your Sacred Groves, and indeed--they outlawed any training or institution of new Druid priests. Druids in Gaul for example, years *after* the Roman conquest under Ceasar, were hunted down and crucified. Later on, the Roman legions wiped out the Druids in Britain and the Isle of Man.

I've read historians that have commented that while Romans adopted Celtic gods, and syncretism proceeded for all of the Celts under Rome--the Romans essentially exterminated the Celtic religion. Before the Romans, Celtic Paganism was vibrant, growing, and distinctive.

After the Romans, Celtic Paganism was a shattered husk of what it was *before*. :)

Good examples all though of how polytheistic religions would likely be far more complex and nuanced--and not always tolerant--like what is depicted in Happy Rainbow Barney Land. LOL

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Agreed. I never understood the concept of societal-level religious tolerance (a concept dating back to the Enlightenment at the earliest and not gaining major traction until the 20th Century) in a medieval fantasy setting, even a polytheistic one.

As seen with Rome and other historical examples, the majority of ancient and post-classical polytheist societies were not the happy-go-lucky beacons of tolerance that the Forgotten Realms is.

Quote from: Doc Sammy;1073725Agreed. I never understood the concept of societal-level religious tolerance (a concept dating back to the Enlightenment at the earliest and not gaining major traction until the 20th Century) in a medieval fantasy setting, even a polytheistic one.

As seen with Rome and other historical examples, the majority of ancient and post-classical polytheist societies were not the happy-go-lucky beacons of tolerance that the Forgotten Realms is.

Greetings!

Indeed! of course, merely being a *barbarian* was good enough to treat you like the animal scum! LOL

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

See Glorantha for a more verossimile treatment of religions.

How much of the tolerance is due to idealism, and how much of it is due to many settings enshrining the concept of Balance between Good and Evil as a necessary and positive thing?

In my games these pantheons are all in competition with one another.

So it's War, peacock. WAR.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1074319How much of the tolerance is due to idealism, and how much of it is due to many settings enshrining the concept of Balance between Good and Evil as a necessary and positive thing?

The latter. That way, evil isn't "openly endorsed" , but good is "put in its place". aka "the Middle Ages as they should have been".

Quote from: Doc Sammy;1073725Agreed. I never understood the concept of societal-level religious tolerance (a concept dating back to the Enlightenment at the earliest and not gaining major traction until the 20th Century) in a medieval fantasy setting, even a polytheistic one.

As seen with Rome and other historical examples, the majority of ancient and post-classical polytheist societies were not the happy-go-lucky beacons of tolerance that the Forgotten Realms is.

The case in China and India are very different than Rome - where you see a new religion like Buddhism spreading, and there is very little conflict between it and existing faiths. They fight over plenty of other stuff, but fighting over religion is rare. Also, polytheistic religions are much more prone to compromise and syncretism - mixing and matching between different sources.

Historical China is far from happy-go-lucky - but it doesn't feature much religious intolerance.

Quote from: jhkim;1074403The case in China and India are very different than Rome - where you see a new religion like Buddhism spreading, and there is very little conflict between it and existing faiths. They fight over plenty of other stuff, but fighting over religion is rare. Also, polytheistic religions are much more prone to compromise and syncretism - mixing and matching between different sources.

Historical China is far from happy-go-lucky - but it doesn't feature much religious intolerance.

Does the conflict between the Legalists and the Confucians count?  I'm in the "sort of" camp, myself, and that one got pretty bad.

I can see the argument that neither's really a religion, though I think they were at least philosophical movements and both tried to make a society in a particular manner.

Greetings!

I think that the Happy Rainbow Barney Land that we often find in Forgotten Realms, et.al, where all of these diverse religions all somehow get along like one big happy family of hippies at an orgy is boring, and limits the campaign. I think that having different religions become political rivals, as well as embracing all manner of pettiness, theological rivalries, heresies, as well as deep-seated bigotry, hatred, and intolerance is far more interesting, as well as entertaining!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1074414Greetings!

I think that the Happy Rainbow Barney Land that we often find in Forgotten Realms, et.al, where all of these diverse religions all somehow get along like one big happy family of hippies at an orgy is boring, and limits the campaign. I think that having different religions become political rivals, as well as embracing all manner of pettiness, theological rivalries, heresies, as well as deep-seated bigotry, hatred, and intolerance is far more interesting, as well as entertaining!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Well this is good fodder for my new Primeval Thule campaign :D - there are a bunch of similar 'good' gods like Ishtar and Asura, I can certainly see lots of petty rivalries among the priesthoods.

FR is Ren Faire Fantasy, and IME it works best if you don't try to fight it. I like the setting for clear Good vs Evil themes, and having Good actually be Good (in a slightly Hippy-Dippy way - I tone the Greenwoodism down a bit, but not all the way). Having a bunch of nice peasants brutally dismembered by demons because they know it will upset the heroes is the kind of darkness you can only get in a setting which already has some light in it.

Quote from: S'mon;1074432Well this is good fodder for my new Primeval Thule campaign :D - there are a bunch of similar 'good' gods like Ishtar and Asura, I can certainly see lots of petty rivalries among the priesthoods.

FR is Ren Faire Fantasy, and IME it works best if you don't try to fight it. I like the setting for clear Good vs Evil themes, and having Good actually be Good (in a slightly Hippy-Dippy way - I tone the Greenwoodism down a bit, but not all the way). Having a bunch of nice peasants brutally dismembered by demons because they know it will upset the heroes is the kind of darkness you can only get in a setting which already has some light in it.

Greetings!

Yep, S'mon! I agree. Just imagine the religious craftsmen alone--all the costume makers, idol carvers, ritual toy makers--how they would love to have the other cults defunded, crushed, or otherwise taken down a peg, you know? But yes, I also love the Good vs Evil theme and imagery. I embrace that in my own campaigns constantly! LOL

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Thing is. Depending on the setting or edition. They dont exactly get along. In fact there is a module for Planescape wherein the PCs get dragged into a convoluted chain of gods from various pantheons not getting along.

For real-world applications in a fantasy land, I'd suggest taking a look at when and why societies that had been at least somewhat tolerant of a minority religions suddenly were not.  I think you'll find in most cases it had less to do with the religious beliefs, and more to do with the land, gold, power, etc. held by members of the minority faith.  In a few other cases, it also had to do with the insecure political power of the majority.  

Heck, you don't even need to cross "pantheons" to see that dynamic in play.  The Albigensian Crusade springs to mind.  It's not as if they hadn't been considered heretical before.  They had been for decades.  It's merely that once there was a lot of wealth to be gained by stamping them out, suddenly others became interested in doing so.  And of course the history of pogroms against the various Jewish populations have often coincided with nobles avoiding debt payments.

That said, I see fantasy pantheons as less like the dynamic of real world religions, and more like a cross between extended, competing Mafia families and their more sincere counter-parts in the public.  Sometimes its personal, sometimes its business, and sometimes they really do believe what they preach.

Quote from: JeremyR;1073701Of course the big difference in D&D is that the gods are actually real and there are worshipers with actual magical powers.

So using actual history where they aren't and didn't doesn't make much sense.

This.

Most of these God's (In the Realms for example) HAVE interacted with each other, they have clashed and they have reconciled.

Let's take our own various mythologies, the Asgard and Vanir, most of them got along.  The Grecian and Egyptian pantheons, pretty much got along within each other.

Quote from: SHARK;1074414Greetings!

I think that the Happy Rainbow Barney Land that we often find in Forgotten Realms, et.al, where all of these diverse religions all somehow get along like one big happy family of hippies at an orgy is boring, and limits the campaign. I think that having different religions become political rivals, as well as embracing all manner of pettiness, theological rivalries, heresies, as well as deep-seated bigotry, hatred, and intolerance is far more interesting, as well as entertaining!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

That's funny, Marine. Real funny. I play in the Forgotten Realms... and Barney got shot full of arrows because he believed in the wrong Gods. Full. Of. Arrows.

Paranoia, bigotry, disinformation, misunderstanding, righteous indignation, indoctrination, rampant ignorance, theological and political dogma, divine right! This is the meat, potatoes and gravy of my Forgotten Realms!

Happy Rainbow Land got invaded, raped and pillaged by the Tuigans. Life sucks chumbo. The Greek Gods have returned and sacrificed Baphomet - because the minotaur demongod is the *BEST* Bull in the market.

The Celestial Bureacracy? Hell yeah, their courts are jam-packed full of souls as they try to gain a foothold in the Old Empires. Mulhorand? They're busy trying to support the Cult of Isis in picking over the corpse of Mystra in the aftermath of her death and the cataclysm of the Weave dissolution - something all the other magic gods detested (screw you Mystra /spit).

Somwhere in all this are political issues between mere monarchial nation-states. It's mayhem! Wait till Arioch arrives!

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1074551Heck, you don't even need to cross "pantheons" to see that dynamic in play.  The Albigensian Crusade springs to mind.  It's not as if they hadn't been considered heretical before.  They had been for decades.  It's merely that once there was a lot of wealth to be gained by stamping them out, suddenly others became interested in doing so.  

   The murder of a papal legate tends to get people in trouble as well ...

You want an idealization of 'tolerance'? Look at Weis & Hickman's vision of post-War Dragonlance, where clerics of the Dark Queen are welcomed onto the grounds of the Temple of Paladine in Palanthas.

Anyone looking for a good read on the subject of religions in fantasy fiction in general and in gaming could do worse than reading M.A.R Barker's "Creating a religion in your spare time for fun and profit".

Quote from: tenbones;1074558That's funny, Marine. Real funny. I play in the Forgotten Realms... and Barney got shot full of arrows because he believed in the wrong Gods. Full. Of. Arrows.

Paranoia, bigotry, disinformation, misunderstanding, righteous indignation, indoctrination, rampant ignorance, theological and political dogma, divine right! This is the meat, potatoes and gravy of my Forgotten Realms!

Happy Rainbow Land got invaded, raped and pillaged by the Tuigans. Life sucks chumbo. The Greek Gods have returned and sacrificed Baphomet - because the minotaur demongod is the *BEST* Bull in the market.

The Celestial Bureacracy? Hell yeah, their courts are jam-packed full of souls as they try to gain a foothold in the Old Empires. Mulhorand? They're busy trying to support the Cult of Isis in picking over the corpse of Mystra in the aftermath of her death and the cataclysm of the Weave dissolution - something all the other magic gods detested (screw you Mystra /spit).

Somwhere in all this are political issues between mere monarchial nation-states. It's mayhem! Wait till Arioch arrives!

Greetings!

OOH-RAH! That's what I'm talking about, Tenbones! Out-fucking-standing! That's the way to make the shit real, you know? Interesting, dramatic. Not all this happy Barney we love everyone BS. Really, Tenbones, I find your kind of interpretation far more realistic, rich, and entertaining, on so many levels. Playing, storytelling, all of it. It makes it a more dynamic world having all these groups and religions competing with each other, making alliances, fucking over some hated rival, starting poroms against the followers of a rival religion, infiltrating courts and law codes against other religions, making all kinds of shit MORE meaningful for all kinds of players and even, tangentially, your NPC's as well, you know?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Really. Is there any other way to sandbox the Realms when Gods are real and their avatars walk the planet?

I SAY THEE NAY!

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1074562The murder of a papal legate tends to get people in trouble as well ...

Yep, when you've got people looking for an excuse to kill you and take your stuff, it's a bad idea to give them one. :)

Quote from: SHARK;1074573Greetings!

OOH-RAH! That's what I'm talking about, Tenbones! Out-fucking-standing! That's the way to make the shit real, you know? Interesting, dramatic. Not all this happy Barney we love everyone BS. Really, Tenbones, I find your kind of interpretation far more realistic, rich, and entertaining, on so many levels. Playing, storytelling, all of it. It makes it a more dynamic world having all these groups and religions competing with each other, making alliances, fucking over some hated rival, starting poroms against the followers of a rival religion, infiltrating courts and law codes against other religions, making all kinds of shit MORE meaningful for all kinds of players and even, tangentially, your NPC's as well, you know?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Well, i like that scenario as well, but let us think a moment about the civilizations built on such a massive strife, hm?
....
My impression is that they would get prone to frequent warring, and that means less time to build societies.
Less time for art, more practicality, less cities unless they happened to inherit them, and even then they would soon become ruins.

You need peace and cooperation to build societies, Rome got big from isolating itself from the warring they did elsewhere, so the population could be in peace, and even on the edges of the roman empire, there wasn't always war.

Quote from: SHARK;1073682Greetings!

In thinking about how all of the various polytheistic religions in D&D are often presented as all playing nice with each other--especially in the Forgotten Realms--but others, as well...

SHARK

Are you familiar with the ancient City State of the Invincible Overlord?  That was one of the first mega-city/dungeons, long before Waterdeep.

The city was full of various religion and cult temples.  The above ground city was full of sweetness and light, where the various priests vied with each other in the courts and commons.  But every temple had at least one basement, usually two or three, and the entire undercity was connected by intervening basements, tunnels, sewers, and what not.  The raids and counter raids were constant.

Do they have after-religious-services ice cream socials in Happy Rainbow Barney Land? :) I like ice cream.

Semi-off topic, but is it strange to want to include a Wrath of the Immortals-style deification quest in a campaign that takes place in an otherwise modern setting?

Because I sort of want to do something like that....

Quote from: Opaopajr;1074782Do they have after-religious-services ice cream socials in Happy Rainbow Barney Land? :) I like ice cream.

Chocolate or vanilla?

Quote from: Doc Sammy;1074791Semi-off topic, but is it strange to want to include a Wrath of the Immortals-style deification quest in a campaign that takes place in an otherwise modern setting?

Because I sort of want to do something like that....

Absolutely not strange. If you have those kinds of powers running around in your setting- just dress the archetypal symbols of that journey to fit your needs. Make it Epic As Fuck.

Quote from: jhkim;1074403The case in China and India are very different than Rome - where you see a new religion like Buddhism spreading, and there is very little conflict between it and existing faiths. They fight over plenty of other stuff, but fighting over religion is rare. Also, polytheistic religions are much more prone to compromise and syncretism - mixing and matching between different sources.

Historical China is far from happy-go-lucky - but it doesn't feature much religious intolerance.

Wrong.. Wrong and Wrong again.

The Polytheistic religions of the New World were in constant conflict with each other especially in South America where we have discovered many polytheistic cultures enslaving and sacrificing other polytheistic cultures to their gods.

The Chinese polytheistic cultures built a wall to keep out other polytheists. Like Trump, it was HUGE!!! And no Nancy didn't pay for that one either. But you can see it from space and it was all because one set of polytheist couldn't get along with another.

As far as India, the earliest Hindu populations were divided between north and south and conflicted with each other. Further, I think it is a stretch to label a religion that developed the Indian caste system as "tolerant".

I would like to also pint out that both the Hindu and Budhists have been fighting those fun loving Muslims since the 7th century, mostly because the Polytheists don't wan to mix with the Muslims and they did not build walls fast enough.

See also high school history books (maybe, at least back in my day).

Speaking of religion in Rainbow Land, I am currently writing my campaign world that models the fun loving medieval conflicts between the ascending Christians, failing Pagans, and the fun loving Muslims to the South. It is amazing how after adventuring in Forgotten Realms for long enough; good ole real world history feels fresh and exciting.

Quote from: MonsterSlayer;1074820Speaking of religion in Rainbow Land, I am currently writing my campaign world that models the fun loving medieval conflicts between the ascending Christians, failing Pagans, and the fun loving Muslims to the South. It is amazing how after adventuring in Forgotten Realms for long enough; good ole real world history feels fresh and exciting.

Side-bar. Have you ever read the "Prince of Nothing" series by R. Scott Bakker? It's a Quasi-Hellenic/Middle-Eastern influenced fantasy with an analog Islam, Christianity, combined with magical schools based on analogic and anagogic philosophy. It is *right* up your alley in terms of what you're describing.

Toss in some Tolkien, Dune, Cthulhu, Holy Crusades and counter-Jihads, Bene Gesserit-style mystcism and beyond Warhammer-levels of pure intense brutality - you might actually like it a lot.

Oh and those elves.... /shiver sweet oblivion... the elves.

Edit: There were once Rainbows in the Three-Seas Region of Earwa. They were devoured.

Quote from: tenbones;1074809Absolutely not strange. If you have those kinds of powers running around in your setting- just dress the archetypal symbols of that journey to fit your needs. Make it Epic As Fuck.

Well, then you might like my recently overhauled and updated Grand Theft Auto campaign setting (https://gtaforums.com/topic/924404-grand-theft-auto-vi-the-family-secrets/), as one of the potential side quests involves a quest for immortality and possibly godhood, inspired by Wrath of the Immortals.

While the quest for deification is optional, if you can complete the quest before beating the main story, it will affect the ending.

Also, there are references to some classic RPG's including D&D, Boot Hill, Vampire: The Masquerade, and even the Amtgard Battle LARP.

Quote from: tenbones;1074823Side-bar. Have you ever read the "Prince of Nothing" series by R. Scott Bakker? It's a Quasi-Hellenic/Middle-Eastern influenced fantasy with an analog Islam, Christianity, combined with magical schools based on analogic and anagogic philosophy. It is *right* up your alley in terms of what you're describing.

Toss in some Tolkien, Dune, Cthulhu, Holy Crusades and counter-Jihads, Bene Gesserit-style mystcism and beyond Warhammer-levels of pure intense brutality - you might actually like it a lot.

Oh and those elves.... /shiver sweet oblivion... the elves.

Edit: There were once Rainbows in the Three-Seas Region of Earwa. They were devoured.

Wow I have not seen that but I am getting it. I've always felt that a bit familiarity helps you relate and have a bit more empathy for the inhabitants.

My campaign is low magic so there are no schools of magic/ bard colleges and most of the warlocks that can cast magic are in the thrall of devils. The elves in my world used to enslave the humans. The elves are grey and alien, and have mostly been driven back to the Fey Realm where the leach power off the slumbering Grey Elf King.

Millennia ago a "chosen" race called the Tall Kings (civilized Goliaths) defeated the elves and drove them back. After years of peace a group of  humans betray the Tall Kings and use magic to kill them all. Humanity falls and there is a split between the northern (Christian analog) and southern (Muslim analog) tribes.

The druids left in the world were handed down their powers from slaves of the Elves. But they are slowly being hunted down by the Northern Duchies. So here is the rub... Magic (aka miracles) work for all three: northern clerics, Fey worshipping druids, and the southern Warlocks. But I don't want to use a moral equivalency cop out so I have a bit more brain storming on that point.

Sorry, written on the phone, excuse any crap grammar.

Quote from: Crawford Tillinghast;1074743Are you familiar with the ancient City State of the Invincible Overlord?  That was one of the first mega-city/dungeons, long before Waterdeep.

The city was full of various religion and cult temples.  The above ground city was full of sweetness and light, where the various priests vied with each other in the courts and commons.  But every temple had at least one basement, usually two or three, and the entire undercity was connected by intervening basements, tunnels, sewers, and what not.  The raids and counter raids were constant.

Greetings!

Hello Crawford! Indeed, the City State of the Invincible Overlord is an excellent city and campaign supplement. Certainly not a weepy, mushy, Barney love fest amongst the religions. I always think that's a good thing! I'm very partial to historical realism. I tend to think that players can better identify with elements of real history, careflly mixed into the fantasy environment. It makes everything in the game more enjoyable, and more meaningful.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1073682In thinking about how all of the various polytheistic religions in D&D are often presented as all playing nice with each other--especially in the Forgotten Realms--but others, as well, I was thinking that being inspired from real-world history makes a campaign significantly more interesting and dynamic. Far from being Happy Rainbow Barney Sweetness, history adds deeper elements and a vivid dynamic that stands in stark contrast.

Yes, in many Real World historical settings, religions have been a source of conflict for the whole of recorded history, including today.

Quote from: SHARK;1073682The Roman Empire, for example, was an empire that embraced a polytheistic, Pagan religion. While the Romans are often celebrated and admired for their religious tolerance--the truth is distinctly, and in my view, harshly different.

The Romans embraced other cults and deities and Romanised them, helping them fit into their Pantheon, or produced hybrid versions of a Roman and non-Roman deity, they were very good at doing this.

Quote from: SHARK;1073682In the Roman conquest of Gaul, Celtic rebellions throughout Gaul were consistently sponsored by and inspired by Druids. The deeper reason for Rome's invasion and conquest of Britain was to crush this outstanding opposition which was fueling the resistance to Rome in Gaul. Once in Britain, the Romans realized that the seat of Druidic power was on the Isle of Man. Rome sent legions there to burn all of the sacred groves down, and kill all of the Druid priests. Druidism was outlawed throughout the Roman Empire. Worshippers of the Celtic Paganism were routinely hunted down, and crucified.

Yes, most people forget that the main reason for Julius Caesar's invasion of Britain was to stop the Britons from helping the Gauls.

The Druid stronghold was Anglesey rather than the Isle of Man, although Druids were on the Isle of Man as well. The Celts seemed to have the idea of an isle being sacred and an isle of an isle being particularly sacred. Britain was an island and Mona was an isle off Britain so was doubly sacred.

Many of the Celtic cults were Romanised, so Minerva-Sulis was worshipped at Bath, for example.

Quote from: SHARK;1073682Rome and Judea. While at first tolerant of Judeaism, the Roman Empire eventually sanctioned and outlawed Judaism as well. The Romans spent several years crushing Jewish rebellions in Judea, and laying siege to the city of Jerusalem, where upon the city's fall, the Romans are believed to have slaughtered upwards of 1,500,000 people. The city was destroyed, and purposely crushed and torn down. The Temple was taken apart, stone by stone, with even the floor stones being burned so hot so that the gold and silver lining and inlays would melt. The Jews were forbidden from even living in Judea, which is how the Jewish Diaspora began. All of the Jewish holy artifacts were carried off to Rome, as depicted in the Arch of Titus.

Judaism was targeted mainly because it wouldn't accept the worship of the Emperor. The same happened with Alexander the Great, they didn't want statues of Alexander the Great as idols to be worshipped. If the Romans hadn't insisted on putting statues of the Emperor in Herod's Temple, Judaism would probably have been tolerated.

Quote from: SHARK;1073682The Roman Empire outlawed Christianity. Thousands, tens of thousands of Christians were martyed. They were routinely fed to the lions in the Arena, and forced to be publicly tortured for the amusement of the vast crowds in the Coliseum. Many Christians were crucified, beheaded, tortured, and soaked in oil, and set on fire to burn to death. Roman agents and spies hunted Christian groups down, and had them placed under arrest and imprisoned, whereupon they were soon tortured and executed, in public, for all to see.

Similarly to Judaism, Christianity wouldn't accept Emperor Worship, but also didn't accept Roman Polytheism, so was a dangerous religion. If it had accepted Emperor-worship and Polytheism, Christianity would not have been persecuted in the way it was.

Quote from: SHARK;1073682At various times, other religions were also outlawed, and persecuted throughout the Roman Empire. There were occasions where in the city of Rome itself, lists of people known to be worshippers and members of various outlawed cults were declared to be heretics and Enemies of the State, and hunted down in the thousands, where they were tortured and executed. They, as well as many of their families as well. Of course, all of their lands, properties, and any wealth, was also siezed by the government.

The same thing happened when the Romans were Christianised, they turned their backs on the Roman Cults, eventually closed the temples or turned them into churches.

Quote from: SHARK;1073682So, a D&D campaign featuring the typical polytheistic system of religions does not have to be a Happy Rainbow Barney Land. Real world history provides plenty of inspiration where polytheistic, Pagan religions were definitely not tolerant and accepting at all.

As has been mentioned before, Glorantha has an inherent tension between some pantheons and is a fine example of polytheism in practice.

Quote from: soltakss;1074963Similarly to Judaism, Christianity wouldn't accept Emperor Worship, but also didn't accept Roman Polytheism, so was a dangerous religion. If it had accepted Emperor-worship and Polytheism, Christianity would not have been persecuted in the way it was.

To be fair, it also wouldn't have been Christianity if it had accepted Emperor-worship and Polytheism. The entire point of it was there was only one God and no matter what you suffered in this life he'd reward you for being faithful forever in Heaven.

Frankly, along with converting the wives (who converted their children), a shared culture of being persecuted really helped unite those who were faithful.

And it worked too... today Roman Polytheism is seen in the same light as fairy tales while Christianity took over the entire Roman Empire and spread across Europe, Asia and eventually to Australia and the Americas.

Quote from: Chris24601;1074975And it worked too... today Roman Polytheism is seen in the same light as fairy tales while Christianity took over the entire Roman Empire and spread across Europe, Asia and eventually to Australia and the Americas.

Reading pre-Christian Roman authors like Ovid in the original Latin*, they don't seem to actually believe in the Roman gods any more than we do. So it wasn't really an even match IMO.

*Yaay for a Grammar School education.

I devoutly worship the Roman Pantheon in real life, but then again, I'm just some random twenty-five year old nutjob in Virginia, so take my words with a grain of salt.

I was raised Protestant Christian and it just did not work out for me.

After spending my teen years as an insufferable militant atheist, I eventually broke down and did some spiritual soul searching...and that is when I found Roman polytheistic paganism.

Although Christianity is not for me and I used to rail against it, I've grown to respect it from a cultural perspective, due to the massive influence it had on Western culture, for good or ill.

In India Adi Shankara (8th century CE Hindu philosopher/teacher) had a condition you had to agree to if you wanted to debate him.  If he won the debate you had to renounce your religion/school of thought and become his disciple.  Or kill yourself.

Adi Shankara also died at the age of 32 so perhaps his own debate skills were overrated.

Then again, historians can't even entirely agree what century he lived in (8th Century AD is common, but others put it as early as the 4th Century BC based on the founding of temples he is said to have founded) or if he was one guy or a composite of several historical figures (which might explain the discrepancy in dating) so it's all rather debatable how good a debater he really was in the first place.

Of course there's got to be tons of legend around him.  I just think he's an excellent inspiration for RPGs and despite his early death and legendary accretions, he's definitely an example of a massively influential polytheist who was not all sugar and spice.  Even if he never existed, his idealization in the thinking of the centuries that follow certainly shows a hard edge to the polytheism of the time.  When your legendary hero is someone who demanded the suicide of debate opponents, things are not all open and accepting of everyone like 2019 takes of polytheism.  Medieval India was not at all an example of "Happy Rainbow Barney Land" from the thread title.

Quote from: Chris24601;1074975To be fair, it also wouldn't have been Christianity if it had accepted Emperor-worship and Polytheism. The entire point of it was there was only one God and no matter what you suffered in this life he'd reward you for being faithful forever in Heaven.

I'm not sure about that:
Considering Jesus' advice of "Give Ceasar what belongs to Ceasar, and give God what belongs to God", it is fully possible that we would simply have had a different kind of "christianity" during the middle ages, while we today might have had virtually the same "modern" and tolerant christianity as we actually do in several places today, just with less of its moral baggage of wars and intolerance.

Quote from: Chris24601;1074975And it worked too... today Roman Polytheism is seen in the same light as fairy tales while Christianity took over the entire Roman Empire and spread across Europe, Asia and eventually to Australia and the Americas.

This is what makes me think that "christianity" was the actual first horseman, and not plague ...

Quote from: MonsterSlayer;1074865Wow I have not seen that but I am getting it. I've always felt that a bit familiarity helps you relate and have a bit more empathy for the inhabitants.

My campaign is low magic so there are no schools of magic/ bard colleges and most of the warlocks that can cast magic are in the thrall of devils. The elves in my world used to enslave the humans. The elves are grey and alien, and have mostly been driven back to the Fey Realm where the leach power off the slumbering Grey Elf King.

Millennia ago a "chosen" race called the Tall Kings (civilized Goliaths) defeated the elves and drove them back. After years of peace a group of  humans betray the Tall Kings and use magic to kill them all. Humanity falls and there is a split between the northern (Christian analog) and southern (Muslim analog) tribes.

The druids left in the world were handed down their powers from slaves of the Elves. But they are slowly being hunted down by the Northern Duchies. So here is the rub... Magic (aka miracles) work for all three: northern clerics, Fey worshipping druids, and the southern Warlocks. But I don't want to use a moral equivalency cop out so I have a bit more brain storming on that point.

Sorry, written on the phone, excuse any crap grammar.

Oh yeah... you're gonna love Bakker. You'll feel dirty when it's over. so dirty...


"There's faith that knows itself as faith, Proyas, and there's faith that confuses itself for knowledge. The first embraces uncertainty, acknowledges the mysteriousness of the God. It begets compassion and tolerance. Who can entirely condemn when they're not entirely certain they're in the right? But the second, Proyas, the second embraces certainty and only pays lip service to the God's mystery. It begets intolerance, hatred, violence."
- R. Scott Bakker, The Darkness That Comes Before

Quote from: RandyB;1074793Chocolate or vanilla?

The one that's non-heretical. :p

Quote from: Chris24601;1074975To be fair, it also wouldn't have been Christianity if it had accepted Emperor-worship and Polytheism. The entire point of it was there was only one God and no matter what you suffered in this life he'd reward you for being faithful forever in Heaven.

Of course. My point was that the Romans didn't persecute Christianity because it was a new religion, as there were lots of new religions in the Roman Empire. It persecuted them because they actively rejected the Divinity of Emperors and Roman Polytheism. Had Christianity found a way to have, for example, the Roman Emperor as higher than the Pope, for example, then it might have survived without persecution, but would have been very different to what it is today. The Byzantines did something similar, when the Emperors became Christian. As for rejecting Polytheism, simply accepting that Roman Deities were the equivalent of Saints would have allowed Christianity to thrive, but, again, it would have been very different.

Quote from: soltakss;1075247simply accepting that Roman Deities were the equivalent of Saints would have allowed Christianity to thrive

That did happen in some places - St Apollo in Greece, St Brigit (my own namesake) in Ireland, are two I can recall. Often they later get retconned as mortal saints of the same name.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1075215The one that's non-heretical. :p

Nice catch. :)

Quote from: jhkim;1074403The case in China and India are very different than Rome - where you see a new religion like Buddhism spreading, and there is very little conflict between it and existing faiths. They fight over plenty of other stuff, but fighting over religion is rare. Also, polytheistic religions are much more prone to compromise and syncretism - mixing and matching between different sources.

Historical China is far from happy-go-lucky - but it doesn't feature much religious intolerance.

This isn't really true, for either country, but especially India. There were huge persecutions of Buddhists done by Brahminists and later by Hindus, until the religion was pretty much extinguished.

In China, there were several periods where a certain religion (Confucianism, Taoism or Buddhism) was favored by the ruling Emperor or Dynasty and the others were suppressed or persecuted to varying degrees.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1076422This isn't really true, for either country, but especially India. There were huge persecutions of Buddhists done by Brahminists and later by Hindus, until the religion was pretty much extinguished.

In China, there were several periods where a certain religion (Confucianism, Taoism or Buddhism) was favored by the ruling Emperor or Dynasty and the others were suppressed or persecuted to varying degrees.

Greetings!

Excellent points, Pundit. In my earlier posts in the thread, I mentioned that governments and societies in both ancient China and ancient India were not always tolerant, and had different periods where they, too, would persecute other religions that were for whatever reasons out of favour.

Then came the cascade of how sweet and tolerant everyone in China and India were.

As you explain, that Rainbow Barney view of the east is bullshit. I'm glad that I am not the only person to actually read deeply into the historical sources.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Earlier in the thread someone mentioned that in D&D the fact religions and gods are real (or, if you're a theist, are a lot more obviously real than their IRL counterparts), and I thought it was worth exploring the implications of that a little more...

Specifically, if people knew with almost total certainty that their Gods were real, I think there might be a lot more religious fanaticism and religious conflict. After all, if the priests of Pelor can *literally bring the dead back to life* or *smite their enemies with holy fire* you can't dismiss their teaching as divorced from the real world, or as irrational superstition. Then if they tell you "worshippers of x religion are sinners", or preach the virtues of a crusade, or advocate social norms of a particular kind, you'd be massively more inclined to believe them.

I don't know about devotion and fanaticism in the face of real gods would be an absolute.

If humanity has proven anything it's that familiarity breeds boredom and contempt rather than zeal. Think of how we regard politicians, professional athletes and movie stars... that's the god down the street.

There's not much call for actual faith if there's no doubt about it existing. When's the last time someone went to war over whether or not there's a moon?

By the same token, while strict atheism wouldn't exist (i.e. claiming the guy who strangled an invincible lion with his bare hands doesn't exist is silly if you can just go to the temple where he's hanging out and wearing said lion's hide as a cape) there would certainly be plenty of skepticism about whether he's really a God or just a really powerful mortal (like an epic level wizard).

Heck, in a setting where you can go and visit Mount Olympus with the right spell you might even see competing schools of philosophy over the nature of the gods... are they composed of normal matter or some sort of "hypermatter"? Are they actually divine or just aliens with powers beyond normal men, users of superscience in the vein of Clarke's law, or visitors from another dimension/time?

If you're going to have fanatical positions you'll find them there... Philosophical holy wars over whether Zeus is a true god and therefore entitled to screw around with his property however he sees fit -or- a space alien who really needs to stop with the abductions, anal probes and experiments that result in alien/human hybrids already.

Quote from: SHARK;1073682The Roman Empire, for example, was an empire that embraced a polytheistic, Pagan religion. While the Romans are often celebrated and admired for their religious tolerance--the truth is distinctly, and in my view, harshly different.

Its kinda hard to make sweeping generalisations about a civilisation that lasted for over a thousand years.  I mean they went from persecuting Christians to being the hub of Christianity.

The DnD version of Polytheism is kinda strange when you think about it.  I have seen interviews with Ed Greenwood who says that in his games the average NPC will worship at all of the temples and especially at the ones that they need the most, so if they are going on a sea voyage then they will make sacrifices to Umerlee for example.  It is unusual for someone to just worship one of the Gods.

Quote from: Shasarak;1078914The DnD version of Polytheism is kinda strange when you think about it.  

It's because players GMs & writers are coming from a Christian monotheist mindset. In my FR game I have had players whose PCs worship Mielikki the Forest Goddess unsure if it was ok to pray to Kelemvor the nice-guy God of the Dead in order to get their friend Raised! I had to assure them Mielikki wouldn't mind. :)

Quote from: S'mon;1078964It's because players GMs & writers are coming from a Christian monotheist mindset. In my FR game I have had players whose PCs worship Mielikki the Forest Goddess unsure if it was ok to pray to Kelemvor the nice-guy God of the Dead in order to get their friend Raised! I had to assure them Mielikki wouldn't mind. :)

Except that, unless you pick a patron god in FR (and the actual creator deity Ao doesn't count... he demands you worship hopped-up mortals as your gods), then you get cast into the Wall of the Faithless (along with babies, small children and anyone incapable of the level of reason needed to choose a patron... have I mentioned I find FR's cosmology utterly horrific). As a result I can see the source of the confusion... if you're required to give your faith to just one god (Monolatry) on pain of a horrific afterlife then praying to other gods, even for things in their wheelhouse, does seem out of place.

The real problem is not simply that they're coming from a monotheistic mindset, its that they want all the Medieval trapping that come from having the institution of the Catholic Church, but have a pagan polytheistic pantheon for whatever reason (originally probably because of all the Greco-Roman/Norse myths and monsters... these days it's probably a mix of inertia and because anything Christian is evil incarnate to the SJWs).

The problem is that genuine polytheism doesn't look anything like the Roman Catholic Church and to get there they ended up going the Monoaltry path where each god is a religion unto itself, complete with it's own moral tenants (which could totally contradict those of another god of the same alignment). The net result is the religious life of most D&D settings end up looking more like American Protestant Christianity with a different denomination's church on every street corner.

Frankly, I think the early D&D settings made a LOT more sense with their generic higher power that clerics received their power from. Even if it's a polytheistic faith, the power all coming from the same general place means that saying prayers to gods specific to the situation doesn't smack into the "must have a specific patron god" element later versions took up.

ETA: as I understand it, the official way religion works in FR for raise dead is that you’d pray to Mielikki (your patron) to intercede with Kelemvor (who controls the aspect of death) to have the person raised.

Forgotten Realms is the poster child for what I call the 'Symbiotic Henotheism' side of D&D religion. Dragonlance is a better representative of the 'Neutralist Relativism' side, to the point that one of the last novels had a 'Good' god declaring: "What we believe is not important. That we believe is."

I was tempted to call it Henotheism at first too, but technically Henotheism is belief that IF there are other gods they're not relevant to the world at all. It's essentially "live and let live, even if those other guys are completely wrong about their faith."

"Monolatry" is more apt as it refers to giving sole devotion to one god within a framework where other gods are known to exist and work in the world.

Quote from: Chris24601;1078987I was tempted to call it Henotheism at first too, but technically Henotheism is belief that IF there are other gods they're not relevant to the world at all. It's essentially "live and let live, even if those other guys are completely wrong about their faith."

"Monolatry" is more apt as it refers to giving sole devotion to one god within a framework where other gods are known to exist and work in the world.

   Thanks. I did Theology, not Religious Studies. :)

Quote from: Chris24601;1078981Except that, unless you pick a patron god in FR (and the actual creator deity Ao doesn't count... he demands you worship hopped-up mortals as your gods), then you get cast into the Wall of the Faithless (along with babies, small children and anyone incapable of the level of reason needed to choose a patron... have I mentioned I find FR's cosmology utterly horrific). As a result I can see the source of the confusion... if you're required to give your faith to just one god (Monolatry) on pain of a horrific afterlife then praying to other gods, even for things in their wheelhouse, does seem out of place.

ETA: as I understand it, the official way religion works in FR for raise dead is that you'd pray to Mielikki (your patron) to intercede with Kelemvor (who controls the aspect of death) to have the person raised.

It was a 4e FR game. Wall of the Faithless not mentioned in 4e FRCS or used IMC.
They needed a priestess of Kelemvor, Treona the Wise Woman, to raise the fallen; she was the one with the Raise Dead ritual.
I guess maybe the players had read older FR fiction or played the computer games - the player most worried was an ex fiction writer for WoTC, she knows Bob Salvatore I think, so the former seems likely!

Quote from: Chris24601;1078981Except that, unless you pick a patron god in FR (and the actual creator deity Ao doesn't count... he demands you worship hopped-up mortals as your gods), then you get cast into the Wall of the Faithless (along with babies, small children and anyone incapable of the level of reason needed to choose a patron... have I mentioned I find FR's cosmology utterly horrific). As a result I can see the source of the confusion... if you're required to give your faith to just one god (Monolatry) on pain of a horrific afterlife then praying to other gods, even for things in their wheelhouse, does seem out of place.

I do not see any thing inherently more utterly horrific with the Wall of the Faithless compared to souls ending up in either Hell or the Abyss for example.

Having an equivalent of a "Wall of the Faithless" is just a good idea for all Gods to agree to on a purely practical basis.  People have to pick a God or else, and dont complain that we did not warn you.

Quote from: Shasarak;1079062I do not see any thing inherently more utterly horrific with the Wall of the Faithless compared to souls ending up in either Hell or the Abyss for example.

Having an equivalent of a "Wall of the Faithless" is just a good idea for all Gods to agree to on a purely practical basis.  People have to pick a God or else, and dont complain that we did not warn you.

The ones in Hell chose to go there. Throwing babies into a wall to be slowly dissolved is utterly horrific.

The "gods" (i.e. hopped-up mortals, not a creator or establisher of morality) tormenting people for not kowtowing to them so they can suck power from their devotion makes them tyrannical dictators running a protection racket. Every single one is evil, regardless of what the alignment wheel might claim.

The only moral course is to find a portal to some other realm and smuggle as many people out as you can (failing that, undeath and deicide also rank as more moral than supporting the current system).

Let's remember too that even if you're one of the faithful you only become a petitioner for a hundred years or so before your consciousness is dissolved and what's left turns into a part of the landscape. Soylant Green/Landscaping is People. And that's only if your patron deity doesn't need you for something more specific first. Pity the poor peritioner who arrives when the privy needs a new seat. Maybe one in a few thousand gets turned into a celestial of some type by having their personality erased.

The Forgotten Realms is a Hell Dimension. It wasn't intended to be one any more than San Francisco was intended to be a shit, needle and homeless camp covered hellhole; but poorly thought out strings of bad decisions by leftists (most notably the Time of Troubles... aka the Root of All Woes*) tends to have that sort of effect on things.

* The Time of Troubles instituted three major changes to the FR cosmology all at once without considering the full ramifications of them; it introduced a supreme God (Ao) whom all the other gods served, it required the gods to draw strength from mortal worship and it establishes that the gods are just mortals who acquired a divine spark by some means and who can be killed and replaced.

Any ONE of those would have been major, but survivable, on its own. Combined they were a lethal cocktail that required draconian action that turned the entire pantheon into monsters preying on mortals to keep the basic D&D setting assumptions intact.

Supreme Overgod acting through lesser gods? Sure. The lesser gods are still greater created beings created by the Overgod to administer His Will.

Gods require worship for strength? Very democratic sounding... the gods are effectively subject to the will of the people. Which makes sense right up until you give them a boss who would logically be worshipped by anyone who doesn't want to settle for second best in terms of who they give praise to. But at least they're still the founders of the moral order right?

Nope, the gods are just hopped-up mortals; different only from a wizard or sorcerer only in scale, not kind. They're no more the source of moral authority than a strongman is. Which would be fine if their powers weren't tied to making other people worship them.

In short it's a perfect storm where in the span of a single novel series they introduce a supreme God more worthy of worship than any of the others (Ao even kicked off the Time of Troubles because the lesser gods were ignoring their responsibilities to mortals), then introduce the change that gods would now be dependent on how many worshipers they have (which might almost work if the gods were at least the incarnation of what they embodied... so the god of justice was created by Ao to embody perfect justice) and then to cap it off revealed that pretty much all the gods were just upcharged mortals who hold power over the portfolios but can be killed or otherwise replaced and these mortals have been told their continued power depends on having as many worshipers as possible.

Basically, they had to turn Ao into a dick who actively punished anyone who tried to worship the true creator of the cosmos (because that would ruin D&Ds polytheistic presumptions) and created the Wall of the Faithless because how dare someone not devote themselves to the worship of a hopped-up mortal?

The end result is a system where the only true God (i.e. creator entity who is whole and complete even without worship) is devoted to forcing his creations to worship false gods who in turn run a supernatural protection racket on the mortals to ensure maximum spiritual energy extraction from the people they're supposed to be serving.

Leftist even screw up their fictional worlds the same way they do the real world.

Quote from: Chris24601;1079092The ones in Hell chose to go there. Throwing babies into a wall to be slowly dissolved is utterly horrific.

The "gods" (i.e. hopped-up mortals, not a creator or establisher of morality) tormenting people for not kowtowing to them so they can suck power from their devotion makes them tyrannical dictators running a protection racket. Every single one is evil, regardless of what the alignment wheel might claim.

The only moral course is to find a portal to some other realm and smuggle as many people out as you can (failing that, undeath and deicide also rank as more moral than supporting the current system).

Let's remember too that even if you're one of the faithful you only become a petitioner for a hundred years or so before your consciousness is dissolved and what's left turns into a part of the landscape. Soylant Green/Landscaping is People. And that's only if your patron deity doesn't need you for something more specific first. Pity the poor peritioner who arrives when the privy needs a new seat. Maybe one in a few thousand gets turned into a celestial of some type by having their personality erased.

The Forgotten Realms is a Hell Dimension. It wasn't intended to be one any more than San Francisco was intended to be a shit, needle and homeless camp covered hellhole; but poorly thought out strings of bad decisions by leftists (most notably the Time of Troubles... aka the Root of All Woes*) tends to have that sort of effect on things.

* The Time of Troubles instituted three major changes to the FR cosmology all at once without considering the full ramifications of them; it introduced a supreme God (Ao) whom all the other gods served, it required the gods to draw strength from mortal worship and it establishes that the gods are just mortals who acquired a divine spark by some means and who can be killed and replaced.

Any ONE of those would have been major, but survivable, on its own. Combined they were a lethal cocktail that required draconian action that turned the entire pantheon into monsters preying on mortals to keep the basic D&D setting assumptions intact.

Supreme Overgod acting through lesser gods? Sure. The lesser gods are still greater created beings created by the Overgod to administer His Will.

Gods require worship for strength? Very democratic sounding... the gods are effectively subject to the will of the people. Which makes sense right up until you give them a boss who would logically be worshipped by anyone who doesn't want to settle for second best in terms of who they give praise to. But at least they're still the founders of the moral order right?

Nope, the gods are just hopped-up mortals; different only from a wizard or sorcerer only in scale, not kind. They're no more the source of moral authority than a strongman is. Which would be fine if their powers weren't tied to making other people worship them.

In short it's a perfect storm where in the span of a single novel series they introduce a supreme God more worthy of worship than any of the others (Ao even kicked off the Time of Troubles because the lesser gods were ignoring their responsibilities to mortals), then introduce the change that gods would now be dependent on how many worshipers they have (which might almost work if the gods were at least the incarnation of what they embodied... so the god of justice was created by Ao to embody perfect justice) and then to cap it off revealed that pretty much all the gods were just upcharged mortals who hold power over the portfolios but can be killed or otherwise replaced and these mortals have been told their continued power depends on having as many worshipers as possible.

Basically, they had to turn Ao into a dick who actively punished anyone who tried to worship the true creator of the cosmos (because that would ruin D&Ds polytheistic presumptions) and created the Wall of the Faithless because how dare someone not devote themselves to the worship of a hopped-up mortal?

The end result is a system where the only true God (i.e. creator entity who is whole and complete even without worship) is devoted to forcing his creations to worship false gods who in turn run a supernatural protection racket on the mortals to ensure maximum spiritual energy extraction from the people they're supposed to be serving.

Leftist even screw up their fictional worlds the same way they do the real world.

Greetings!

Very nice analysis of Forgotten Realms Cosmology, Chris! I agree with you, FR cosmology is just...terrible. Back in the *Grey Box* days, it seemed somehow primordial, and rough, not entirely different from the Greyhawk Cosmology. I have always had my own World of Thandor, so whatever was going on in FR was not critical or important to my own campaigns at all. In my World of Thandor, I specifically do not get into too much detail of cosmology, prefering to have much of the afterlife and the supernatural, and the way various divine deities and powers operate as being mysterious, and largely unknowable by mortals. This element of mystery and a degree of uncertainty holds true even for clerics, priests, and the most devout of worshippers. I must say, it has been entirely sufficient for running campaigns, and has also provided enough mystery and inspiration simultaneously, to keep player characters satisfied and content, as well as providing enough cosmological depth for various religions throughout the campaign world. That's how I run it, and I'm absolutely convinced that it is the best way to handle the campaign's cosmology and religion. :)

However, along the way, I have also been a solid fan of FR. I have most of all the game supplements for FR throughout the years, as well as many of the novels. Having said that, the novels are entirely garbage and incoherent Liberal fuzzy nonsense when it comes to determining campaign parameters for the actual *game*. You cited the much-hated "Time of Troubles." Exactly. That's part of the problem with atheistic, mushy-minded Liberals though--their religious cosmology is essentially one big Happy Rainbow Barney land, which has to play suck up to the vanity of humanity in an all-inclusive soup where everyone is indulged with sweet Liberal atheistic or humanistic dreams. The FR correlation with any kind of divine cosmology that actually makes sense or has any merit for being taken seriously is so pathetic and convoluted, it is really an artistic tragedy.

I have never since been able to take FR seriously. Year by year, edition by edition, the FR world has become a sad mockery and an incoherent mess, when compared to what was presented in FR *The Grey Box*. There's certainly parts and aspects of FR that I still enjoy, admire, and appreciate, but the narrative/story/cosmology is absolute garbage. If one was a real fan of using FR as a campaign world, you would be better served by keeping the world, and scrubbing the FR cosmology entirely, and installing your own. Whatever you come up with is doubtlessly more coherent and meaningful than what FR has become, and also likely to not insult the intellect and or spiritual sensibilities of your players, either. Or, alternatively, just absolutely ignore virtually anything that has come after the *Grey Box*.

SHARK lights up his Savenelli pipe, smoking some fine tobacco. You know, Chris, I really hate the FR cosmology. It's such a travesty what that game world has come to through the years. Tragic indeed.:)

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Chris24601;1079092The ones in Hell chose to go there. Throwing babies into a wall to be slowly dissolved is utterly horrific.

If the babies parents did not want them to be thrown into the wall then they would have been "baptised" or what ever the FR equivalent is so that they would not be.  It is not rocket science, if you live in the FR then you know what the stakes are.  If your baby ends up in the Wall then its because you are a utterly horrific parent just like anti-vaxers are now.

QuoteThe "gods" (i.e. hopped-up mortals, not a creator or establisher of morality) tormenting people for not kowtowing to them so they can suck power from their devotion makes them tyrannical dictators running a protection racket. Every single one is evil, regardless of what the alignment wheel might claim.

The only moral course is to find a portal to some other realm and smuggle as many people out as you can (failing that, undeath and deicide also rank as more moral than supporting the current system).

Let's remember too that even if you're one of the faithful you only become a petitioner for a hundred years or so before your consciousness is dissolved and what's left turns into a part of the landscape. Soylant Green/Landscaping is People. And that's only if your patron deity doesn't need you for something more specific first. Pity the poor peritioner who arrives when the privy needs a new seat. Maybe one in a few thousand gets turned into a celestial of some type by having their personality erased.

The Forgotten Realms is a Hell Dimension. It wasn't intended to be one any more than San Francisco was intended to be a shit, needle and homeless camp covered hellhole; but poorly thought out strings of bad decisions by leftists (most notably the Time of Troubles... aka the Root of All Woes*) tends to have that sort of effect on things.

* The Time of Troubles instituted three major changes to the FR cosmology all at once without considering the full ramifications of them; it introduced a supreme God (Ao) whom all the other gods served, it required the gods to draw strength from mortal worship and it establishes that the gods are just mortals who acquired a divine spark by some means and who can be killed and replaced.

Any ONE of those would have been major, but survivable, on its own. Combined they were a lethal cocktail that required draconian action that turned the entire pantheon into monsters preying on mortals to keep the basic D&D setting assumptions intact.

Supreme Overgod acting through lesser gods? Sure. The lesser gods are still greater created beings created by the Overgod to administer His Will.

Gods require worship for strength? Very democratic sounding... the gods are effectively subject to the will of the people. Which makes sense right up until you give them a boss who would logically be worshipped by anyone who doesn't want to settle for second best in terms of who they give praise to. But at least they're still the founders of the moral order right?

Nope, the gods are just hopped-up mortals; different only from a wizard or sorcerer only in scale, not kind. They're no more the source of moral authority than a strongman is. Which would be fine if their powers weren't tied to making other people worship them.

In short it's a perfect storm where in the span of a single novel series they introduce a supreme God more worthy of worship than any of the others (Ao even kicked off the Time of Troubles because the lesser gods were ignoring their responsibilities to mortals), then introduce the change that gods would now be dependent on how many worshipers they have (which might almost work if the gods were at least the incarnation of what they embodied... so the god of justice was created by Ao to embody perfect justice) and then to cap it off revealed that pretty much all the gods were just upcharged mortals who hold power over the portfolios but can be killed or otherwise replaced and these mortals have been told their continued power depends on having as many worshipers as possible.

Basically, they had to turn Ao into a dick who actively punished anyone who tried to worship the true creator of the cosmos (because that would ruin D&Ds polytheistic presumptions) and created the Wall of the Faithless because how dare someone not devote themselves to the worship of a hopped-up mortal?

The end result is a system where the only true God (i.e. creator entity who is whole and complete even without worship) is devoted to forcing his creations to worship false gods who in turn run a supernatural protection racket on the mortals to ensure maximum spiritual energy extraction from the people they're supposed to be serving.

Leftist even screw up their fictional worlds the same way they do the real world.

I dont see any inherent problem with Gods being powerful mortals, that is exactly the way that the DnD level system works, characters gaining experience by sucking it out of someone else.  And if you think that system turns into a world into a Hell dimension then you have not really seen the plane in question.  There really is a (9) Hell dimension and strangely it does not look very much like the Forgotten Realms.

If you do worship a God then why would you have a problem becoming one with them after you die?  I mean I am trying to see the draw back there for a worshiper.  As for your other comments well yeah Ao is a bit of stretch but with the "Simulation" theory it probably makes sense from that perspective.

Quote from: SHARK;1079100Greetings!

Very nice analysis of Forgotten Realms Cosmology, Chris! I agree with you, FR cosmology is just...terrible. Back in the *Grey Box* days, it seemed somehow primordial, and rough, not entirely different from the Greyhawk Cosmology. I have always had my own World of Thandor, so whatever was going on in FR was not critical or important to my own campaigns at all. In my World of Thandor, I specifically do not get into too much detail of cosmology, prefering to have much of the afterlife and the supernatural, and the way various divine deities and powers operate as being mysterious, and largely unknowable by mortals. This element of mystery and a degree of uncertainty holds true even for clerics, priests, and the most devout of worshippers. I must say, it has been entirely sufficient for running campaigns, and has also provided enough mystery and inspiration simultaneously, to keep player characters satisfied and content, as well as providing enough cosmological depth for various religions throughout the campaign world. That's how I run it, and I'm absolutely convinced that it is the best way to handle the campaign's cosmology and religion. :)

However, along the way, I have also been a solid fan of FR. I have most of all the game supplements for FR throughout the years, as well as many of the novels. Having said that, the novels are entirely garbage and incoherent Liberal fuzzy nonsense when it comes to determining campaign parameters for the actual *game*. You cited the much-hated "Time of Troubles." Exactly. That's part of the problem with atheistic, mushy-minded Liberals though--their religious cosmology is essentially one big Happy Rainbow Barney land, which has to play suck up to the vanity of humanity in an all-inclusive soup where everyone is indulged with sweet Liberal atheistic or humanistic dreams. The FR correlation with any kind of divine cosmology that actually makes sense or has any merit for being taken seriously is so pathetic and convoluted, it is really an artistic tragedy.

I have never since been able to take FR seriously. Year by year, edition by edition, the FR world has become a sad mockery and an incoherent mess, when compared to what was presented in FR *The Grey Box*. There's certainly parts and aspects of FR that I still enjoy, admire, and appreciate, but the narrative/story/cosmology is absolute garbage. If one was a real fan of using FR as a campaign world, you would be better served by keeping the world, and scrubbing the FR cosmology entirely, and installing your own. Whatever you come up with is doubtlessly more coherent and meaningful than what FR has become, and also likely to not insult the intellect and or spiritual sensibilities of your players, either. Or, alternatively, just absolutely ignore virtually anything that has come after the *Grey Box*.

SHARK lights up his Savenelli pipe, smoking some fine tobacco. You know, Chris, I really hate the FR cosmology. It's such a travesty what that game world has come to through the years. Tragic indeed.:)

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Hey, SHARK

My first experiences with the Forgotten Realms were through the Douglas Niles novels about the Moonshae Isles and I have to say that they completely disagree with your assessment of the "one big Happy Rainbow Barney land" cosmology.  Maybe with that as my touchstone the Forgotten Realms looks much darker then your experience.

For example, if there really are Gods of Murder, Assassins and Tyranny out to get you then all of a sudden those Gods of Beauty, Magic or the Sun do not look so threatening anymore.  When hordes of Orcs can come boiling out of the mountains, packs of Trolls from the swamps or flights of Dragons from who knows where all wanting to kill your worshipers then I would imagine you make peace with the other "good" guys because who needs to start a war on all fronts?

No offense to you SHARK but the Forgotten Realms pantheons makes just as much sense as any other pantheon that I have seen.

Quote from: Shasarak;1079109Hey, SHARK

My first experiences with the Forgotten Realms were through the Douglas Niles novels about the Moonshae Isles and I have to say that they completely disagree with your assessment of the "one big Happy Rainbow Barney land" cosmology.  Maybe with that as my touchstone the Forgotten Realms looks much darker then your experience.

For example, if there really are Gods of Murder, Assassins and Tyranny out to get you then all of a sudden those Gods of Beauty, Magic or the Sun do not look so threatening anymore.  When hordes of Orcs can come boiling out of the mountains, packs of Trolls from the swamps or flights of Dragons from who knows where all wanting to kill your worshipers then I would imagine you make peace with the other "good" guys because who needs to start a war on all fronts?

No offense to you SHARK but the Forgotten Realms pantheons makes just as much sense as any other pantheon that I have seen.

Greetings!

Hello, Shasarak! *bastard*!!:) I also have fond memories of the Moonshaes book, by Douglas Niles. I definitely agree that was certainly one of the better FR novels produced. However, Shasarak, it certainly *isn't* my contention that FR cosmology is bad per se *because* of lots of different evil gods and their minions, and also lots of neutral and good deities. I have no problem with that foundation, at all.

What I don't like, however, is making the "gods" just be juiced-up former mortals. I think that is just nonsense. I think the whole buffet of gods dying, being reborn, coming back, getting killed and replaced by goddess "X" and just all of that stuff after the "Time of Troubles" is where the cosmology begins to get fucked. Remember, many of the "In-Game" changes to FR were not, demonstrably, made for some legitimate mechanical reason. Rather, they were done so specifically in response to various changes and BS that came about directly from the *novels*. Then, after that, to make the world more in-line with the new edition they had some other terrible raft of changes to FR cosmology. From my perspective, from the "Time of Troubles" onwards, it was generally a cascade of poorly-constructed elements dealing with the world as a whole; the gods; and the cosmological framework. I think it was the "Spell Plague" or some BS. I can't cite them all at the moment--but there were a bunch of changes that were terrible. I remember at the time of release, reading through them, and wondering, "WTF?" you know? Am I making sense with my criticism? I hope so.:)

FR having many different pantheons of gods is not a problem. As you noted, most every other game-world also has multiple divine pantheons. The problems come from how WOTC, etc. has made canon the various cosmological foundations and relationships, both between the gods and mortals--and between each other. Those foundations, relationships, and mechanics become convoluted, and nonsensical, especially when taken as a whole. It is even more bewildering and frustrating because much of it has been constructed to assuage the humanistic sensibilities of Liberals, and also to embrace the numerous ideas pushed throughout a large number of FR novels, most of which, though not all, certainly--at the end of the day were mediocre at best. Even if one enjoys such novels as escapist literature, that is a whole different ballgame than actually *embracing* such narrative concepts and happenings as an essential part of the game world.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1079116Greetings!

Hello, Shasarak! *bastard*!!:) I also have fond memories of the Moonshaes book, by Douglas Niles. I definitely agree that was certainly one of the better FR novels produced. However, Shasarak, it certainly *isn't* my contention that FR cosmology is bad per se *because* of lots of different evil gods and their minions, and also lots of neutral and good deities. I have no problem with that foundation, at all.

What I don't like, however, is making the "gods" just be juiced-up former mortals. I think that is just nonsense. I think the whole buffet of gods dying, being reborn, coming back, getting killed and replaced by goddess "X" and just all of that stuff after the "Time of Troubles" is where the cosmology begins to get fucked. Remember, many of the "In-Game" changes to FR were not, demonstrably, made for some legitimate mechanical reason. Rather, they were done so specifically in response to various changes and BS that came about directly from the *novels*. Then, after that, to make the world more in-line with the new edition they had some other terrible raft of changes to FR cosmology. From my perspective, from the "Time of Troubles" onwards, it was generally a cascade of poorly-constructed elements dealing with the world as a whole; the gods; and the cosmological framework. I think it was the "Spell Plague" or some BS. I can't cite them all at the moment--but there were a bunch of changes that were terrible. I remember at the time of release, reading through them, and wondering, "WTF?" you know? Am I making sense with my criticism? I hope so.:)

FR having many different pantheons of gods is not a problem. As you noted, most every other game-world also has multiple divine pantheons. The problems come from how WOTC, etc. has made canon the various cosmological foundations and relationships, both between the gods and mortals--and between each other. Those foundations, relationships, and mechanics become convoluted, and nonsensical, especially when taken as a whole. It is even more bewildering and frustrating because much of it has been constructed to assuage the humanistic sensibilities of Liberals, and also to embrace the numerous ideas pushed throughout a large number of FR novels, most of which, though not all, certainly--at the end of the day were mediocre at best. Even if one enjoys such novels as escapist literature, that is a whole different ballgame than actually *embracing* such narrative concepts and happenings as an essential part of the game world.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

SHARK you have some good points there, certainly endless "Times of Trouble" just because TSR/WotC want to change the rules again was annoying.  In many ways I think the current 5e tactic of just not giving a shit how everything fits together is probably worse though it is just the final nail for me after the 4e version jumping the figurative SHARK so to speak.

My first experience with Gods in DnD was via the Deities and Demi-Gods book which listed the stats of the Gods and as we all know, if it has stats then it can be killed.  So it seemed only natural for that to then flow through to the Forgotten Realms where yes in fact Gods can be killed and powerful mortals (PCs?) can take their place.  Its not even a unique idea in DnD, the Gold box Immortal set allowed your character to become a Mystara "God".  To be honest the thought of a God in DnD that is the equivalent of a "Beard in the Sky" like Ao, omniscient and omnipotent does seem ridiculous and on the other hand it was just the one set of novels.

I can see how things look like a cascade of poorly thought out ideas.  I would say the reason is probably just because there were a large number of people implementing contradictory and poorly thought out ideas.  In some ways I prefer the convoluted mish mash of ideas to the 4e version of sterile trimmed down perfectly senisble version.  In my mind the confusing version just seems like a more realistic lived in setting.

I dont really understand the argument of Liberal sensibilities though.  Unless you mean stuff like the push to get the monstrous races moved towards the "just misunderstood not really the bad guys you thought" races.  Certainly the big two Salvatore and Greenwood did not seem very liberal, too many evil POCs in Salvatore and too much sexy times in Greenwood for the liberal crowd.

Quote from: Shasarak;1079125SHARK you have some good points there, certainly endless "Times of Trouble" just because TSR/WotC want to change the rules again was annoying.  In many ways I think the current 5e tactic of just not giving a shit how everything fits together is probably worse though it is just the final nail for me after the 4e version jumping the figurative SHARK so to speak.

My first experience with Gods in DnD was via the Deities and Demi-Gods book which listed the stats of the Gods and as we all know, if it has stats then it can be killed.  So it seemed only natural for that to then flow through to the Forgotten Realms where yes in fact Gods can be killed and powerful mortals (PCs?) can take their place.  Its not even a unique idea in DnD, the Gold box Immortal set allowed your character to become a Mystara "God".  To be honest the thought of a God in DnD that is the equivalent of a "Beard in the Sky" like Ao, omniscient and omnipotent does seem ridiculous and on the other hand it was just the one set of novels.

I can see how things look like a cascade of poorly thought out ideas.  I would say the reason is probably just because there were a large number of people implementing contradictory and poorly thought out ideas.  In some ways I prefer the convoluted mish mash of ideas to the 4e version of sterile trimmed down perfectly senisble version.  In my mind the confusing version just seems like a more realistic lived in setting.

I dont really understand the argument of Liberal sensibilities though.  Unless you mean stuff like the push to get the monstrous races moved towards the "just misunderstood not really the bad guys you thought" races.  Certainly the big two Salvatore and Greenwood did not seem very liberal, too many evil POCs in Salvatore and too much sexy times in Greenwood for the liberal crowd.

Greetings!

Thank you, Shasarak! Indeed, through the mythology, and the original Deities and Demi-gods, with the stats, there was an implication of player characters fighting gods and killing them. Honestly, I think that has its roots a little bit in mythology, but draws moreso from powerful fantasy literature of the time--see Moorcock's Elric of Melnibone, Karl Edward Wagoner's Kane, and Howard's Conan the Barbarian--all of which embraced various short stories where the heroes battled against and defeated ancient, monstrous gods.

So, there is some mythological and literary precedent. However, while exciting and fine in a novel--in a game, such feats actually tend to introduce far more problematic elements than they are worth, so to speak. I tend to think simply mystifying the deities and making them impossible to fight directly is a far more sensible approach, and has many enormous and salient strengths for the believability and sustainability of the campaign, and in the bargain, the campaign world isn't "losing" anything.

You hit the 4E Abomination right on the head. As I mentioned, I use the World of Thandor. However, I too, was enraged and just disgusted with what WOTC did to FR during 4E. Absolute abomination. you know? I read whole lists of people running FR that proclaimed at the time, "Fuck WOTC! I'm just ignoring everything they do in FR in 4E. I have all the 3E FR stuff, which was beautiful, so fuck 'em." The rage by FR fans was certainly palpable. I also understand your point about prefering a convoluted mess, as opposed to whatever 4E was doing. I can see how, yeah, that it is ok to be wild and messy. More realistic and believable. Similar to how I handle cosmology in World of Thandor. I, however, don't write a bunch of stuff down, so there is no canon to contradict itself, or become stupid. I intentionally leave it blank, unspoken, or just mysterious and supposed and theoretical by whatever religious authorities. As Saint Paul says in the Scriptures, "Yea, for now we see as through a glass darkly." I always like that, because even there, Saint Paul discusses how God's mind is not *ours*, that human beings are *created creatures* and because we are mortal, our mortal minds cannot possibly comprehend the divine mind of God. There are mysteries and things in the world that we cannot possibly understand, and that is ok. Having faith in God, even when we do not comprehend everything, is what is really important. A divine God is under no obligation to explain Himself to us, the creation. God doesn't need to come running to us, and cater to us by explaining everything to our satisfaction. Anyhow, theology and philosophy aside, I think that is some meaningful philosophy that lends a great deal of realism to whatever cosmology we are building in a game world. I think to insist that it must be otherwise, generally tends to cheapen and "mortalize" the divine, and thereupon you gradually travel down the road where philosophically, either one god, or pantheons of many gods, cease to embrace a great sense of divine awe and majesty, and instead take upon themselves the shabby robes of mortal pettiness, corruption, and having a sense of being more mortal, rather than *DIVINE*the gods to be divine.

I like the gods to be *divine*--not merely powerful mortals with more makeup on.

As to Liberal sensibilities, yeah, the whole monsters are misunderstood thing, but also a liberalism creeping into every aspect of the game. There are many liberal ideas in FR cosmology, and the whole game, in the sense that there is a more liberalized viewpoint expressed, as opposed to a viewpoint more informed by a traditional, conservative religious viewpoint. Then, there's the whole traditional conservative approaches to the game world, like player characters, races, and so on, that held sway for decades, but now are being thrown out and discarded by the SJW's. It's a gradual influence, lots of little things, that gradually add up over time to *colour* the game campaign differently.

Like supposed "paladins" being able to be whatever alignment the player wants them to be.:)

That's just SJW heresy, my friend! HERESY!!!:)

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1079100If one was a real fan of using FR as a campaign world, you would be better served by keeping the world, and scrubbing the FR cosmology entirely, and installing your own.

For my 4e FR game I just used the 4e cosmology, which is a lot better than the 2e FR garbage - and sticking with that 4e version for my current 5e FR game.

Quote from: S'mon;1079138For my 4e FR game I just used the 4e cosmology, which is a lot better than the 2e FR garbage - and sticking with that 4e version for my current 5e FR game.

Greetings!

Well, my friend, what was aweful about 2E FR? I'm not up on the precise framework of what they did in 4E--but from what I saw that WOTC did to the FR world, the North or whatever being scrubbed, whole cities and regions gone, apparently it was a mess. Did you like the "Spell Plague" thing, S'mon? I'm not familiar with 4E, but the changes I saw to the campaign there as a whole were just terrible! LOL. Really, though. What did you like--or since you still use the 4E cosmology--what do you like about it, S'mon? Explain how it is an improvement over the 3E version of FR, which I am more familiar with.:)

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1079144Greetings!

Well, my friend, what was aweful about 2E FR? I'm not up on the precise framework of what they did in 4E--but from what I saw that WOTC did to the FR world, the North or whatever being scrubbed, whole cities and regions gone, apparently it was a mess. Did you like the "Spell Plague" thing, S'mon? I'm not familiar with 4E, but the changes I saw to the campaign there as a whole were just terrible! LOL. Really, though. What did you like--or since you still use the 4E cosmology--what do you like about it, S'mon? Explain how it is an improvement over the 3E version of FR, which I am more familiar with.:)

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

2e FR - thinking of the Time of Troubles, the bowdlerisation, removal of demons/devils/assassins/half-orcs, et al.

I think the North/Savage Frontier/Western Heartlands region has been pretty much unchanged through all editions. They scrubbed various fringe countries, but these never got a mention IMC anyway, and I basically never used any Spellplague stuff, so for my game the 5e 'reversion' looks exactly like my version of 4e FR.

Re cosmology, 4e FR assumes the 'World Axis (https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/World_Axis_cosmology)' cosmology of default 4e, as far as I can tell - at any rate, that's what I used. Not that it came up much. The ultimate fate of most souls is unknown - a small minority are snagged by their patron gods for use as divine servants, at least for a while, but most pass through the Shadowfell & Kelemvor's Hall to an unknown fate. No Wall of the Faithless is mentioned in 4e FR, I don't think it officially exists.

I'm not that familiar with 3e FR, and until 4e I had never been able to successfully run an FR campaign, so I can't really comment on that. I definitely found the largely blank-slate 4e FR a lot easier to run than previous versions, though I did more recently run a short AD&D/OSRIC PBP set in the 1e FR era. My 4e FR was determinedly non-canon, and to make that clear it includes Hallomak Stromm (http://frloudwater.blogspot.com/2013/01/hallomak-stromm-of-waterdeep.html), Savant-Sage of Waterdeep, as a deliberate satire on Elminster & Greenwood. Early in the campaign Hallomak attended the funeral in Shadowdale of an old sage. ;)

"When powerful human wizards get into their second century or so - the skein of their lives drawn thin 'like butter stretched over too much bread' as someone wise once said - they often start going mad, and are soon claiming to be gods, immortals, five-thousand years old Netherese Archmages, et al. 'Tis sad, but inevitable." - from The Ruminations of Hallomak Stromm, chapter XVII of 'Hallomak Stromm: The Man, The Legend', 1st edition 1480 DR, Waterdeep Press.

Quote from: SHARK;1079136As to Liberal sensibilities, yeah, the whole monsters are misunderstood thing, but also a liberalism creeping into every aspect of the game. There are many liberal ideas in FR cosmology, and the whole game, in the sense that there is a more liberalized viewpoint expressed, as opposed to a viewpoint more informed by a traditional, conservative religious viewpoint. Then, there's the whole traditional conservative approaches to the game world, like player characters, races, and so on, that held sway for decades, but now are being thrown out and discarded by the SJW's. It's a gradual influence, lots of little things, that gradually add up over time to *colour* the game campaign differently.

Like supposed "paladins" being able to be whatever alignment the player wants them to be.:)

That's just SJW heresy, my friend! HERESY!!!:)

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I have always been a big proponent of keeping the Paladin as Lawful Good.  I see that Pathfinder 2 is going to be keeping the Paladin as LG while opening up the class as a Champion which seems like a win win solution.

I always get a good laugh out of the people wringing their hands about misunderstood Orcs and how Drow are really just Fantasy Black people because look at them they are black.

Quote from: Shasarak;1079262I have always been a big proponent of keeping the Paladin as Lawful Good.  I see that Pathfinder 2 is going to be keeping the Paladin as LG while opening up the class as a Champion which seems like a win win solution.

I always get a good laugh out of the people wringing their hands about misunderstood Orcs and how Drow are really just Fantasy Black people because look at them they are black.

I'll chime in here, in 5e, with it 'Any Alignment Paladins', that only fits to certain of the Paths, the Devotional one is clearly meant to be Lawful Good.  Most of the tenants are the traditional AD&D 2e system.  Some others, can fit with other alignments.

I will always disagree with anyone who thinks that Paladins can be Chaotic, mind you.  The Path of a Paladin is one of belief in in something, (other than a God, especially in the Realms) like a code of conduct, principles, rules or something greater, that requires a belief in structure, something a Lawful X is mentally designed for, and a Neutral X can fit into, but the free spirited Chaos X simply do not have the drive to strive to a belief, good or bad.

I'll disagree, but I won't stop people from having Chaotic Paladins in their games.  I don't have the right to dictate how anyone plays their game.

Quote from: SharkI like the gods to be *divine*--not merely powerful mortals with more makeup on.

Poor clueless sod. Any planar worth their salt knows such a thing doesn't exist. Ask the floating corpse in the astral where it's "divinity" is. ;)

Quote from: S'mon;10791452e FR - thinking of the Time of Troubles, the bowdlerisation, removal of demons/devils/assassins/half-orcs, et al.

I think the North/Savage Frontier/Western Heartlands region has been pretty much unchanged through all editions. They scrubbed various fringe countries, but these never got a mention IMC anyway, and I basically never used any Spellplague stuff, so for my game the 5e 'reversion' looks exactly like my version of 4e FR.

Re cosmology, 4e FR assumes the 'World Axis (https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/World_Axis_cosmology)' cosmology of default 4e, as far as I can tell - at any rate, that's what I used. Not that it came up much. The ultimate fate of most souls is unknown - a small minority are snagged by their patron gods for use as divine servants, at least for a while, but most pass through the Shadowfell & Kelemvor's Hall to an unknown fate. No Wall of the Faithless is mentioned in 4e FR, I don't think it officially exists.

I'm not that familiar with 3e FR, and until 4e I had never been able to successfully run an FR campaign, so I can't really comment on that. I definitely found the largely blank-slate 4e FR a lot easier to run than previous versions, though I did more recently run a short AD&D/OSRIC PBP set in the 1e FR era. My 4e FR was determinedly non-canon, and to make that clear it includes Hallomak Stromm (http://frloudwater.blogspot.com/2013/01/hallomak-stromm-of-waterdeep.html), Savant-Sage of Waterdeep, as a deliberate satire on Elminster & Greenwood. Early in the campaign Hallomak attended the funeral in Shadowdale of an old sage. ;)

"When powerful human wizards get into their second century or so - the skein of their lives drawn thin 'like butter stretched over too much bread' as someone wise once said - they often start going mad, and are soon claiming to be gods, immortals, five-thousand years old Netherese Archmages, et al. 'Tis sad, but inevitable." - from The Ruminations of Hallomak Stromm, chapter XVII of 'Hallomak Stromm: The Man, The Legend', 1st edition 1480 DR, Waterdeep Press.

Greetings!

Hallomak Stromm sounds fucking awesome, S'mon! LOL!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1079847Greetings!

Hallomak Stromm sounds fucking awesome, S'mon! LOL!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

He's a legend in his own lunchtime!

Along the whole of the Sword Coast, from Baldur's Gate to Neverwinter, there is no greater explorer, Sage, or fighter against Demons and Devils than Hallomak Stromm!" - From chapter I of Hallomak Stromm: The Man, The Legend. By Hallomak Stromm.

Look for the Hallomak Septology in all good Waterdhavian bookshops -"Hallomak: The Making of a Sage", "Hallomak in Hell", "Return of Hallomak", "Hallomak Dawn" "The Seven Archmage Girlfriends of Hallomak", etc.

Quote from: S'mon;1079865He's a legend in his own lunchtime!

Along the whole of the Sword Coast, from Baldur's Gate to Neverwinter, there is no greater explorer, Sage, or fighter against Demons and Devils than Hallomak Stromm!" - From chapter I of Hallomak Stromm: The Man, The Legend. By Hallomak Stromm.

Look for the Hallomak Septology in all good Waterdhavian bookshops -"Hallomak: The Making of a Sage", "Hallomak in Hell", "Return of Hallomak", "Hallomak Dawn" "The Seven Archmage Girlfriends of Hallomak", etc.

Greetings!

LOL! Great stuff, S'mon! You know, that reminds me. I remember chomping on FR "The Grey Box"--and Elminster was this cool, interesting, heroic and wise mage. Someone that was an appropriate and intriguing patron, mentor, and friend for the player characters to meet, and become friends with.

Then, there was that book where Elminster is fucking not one, not two, but *Seven* uber hot divine demi-goddess sorceresses, that all just happened to also be sisters.

Geesus, you know? When did Elminster go from being the cool, interesting mage living in some medieval backwater on the fringe of nowhere, to the center of a continent-spanning sexfest and soap-opera?

Even back then, I wasn't impressed. Beyond the Crystal Shard, Moonsheas, and early Drizz't books, I thought most of what poured out after that was increasingly pathetic garbage. Somehow, Elminster got mutated into some uber-jackass that seemed to always be dividing his time between fucking all of these demi-goddesses and sweeping in to save whoever in some fucking novel.

Just a sad evolution of a character that seemed initially to have very solid medievalesque and heroic foundations.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1079880Then, there was that book where Elminster is fucking not one, not two, but *Seven* uber hot divine demi-goddess sorceresses, that all just happened to also be sisters.

Geesus, you know? When did Elminster go from being the cool, interesting mage living in some medieval backwater on the fringe of nowhere, to the center of a continent-spanning sexfest and soap-opera?

Whats the point of spending years pouring over dusty manuscripts to master magic if you can not use the power to bang hot chicks?

Greetings!

It does seem like FR was steadily cluster-fucked as time went on with new supplements. The sourcebooks and adventures continued to be written under the shade of all that was going on with the myriad NPC's introduced throughout the FR novels, increasingly making the published adventures revolve around what the celebrity NPC's were doing. Elminster is an especially egregious example of this process, but there were many more.

While many players and fans of FR came to hate this dynamic, it seemed to create an entire "bubble-world" which served to create distance between the game world, and the players. That sort of constant dissonance wasn't a good thing for the ongoing development of the game world. You also see a process where the FR deities are increasingly involved in mortal affairs directly, through many novels. While on one hand being something of a nod towards Greek mythological stories, I'm not convinced that such an implementation in FR was a very beneficial move.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK