| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Wyvernspur |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 04:24:33
Since Wizards seems intent on killing of deities(though as we know from Planescape no God is truly dead their just big islands in the astral plane waiting to be resurrected or built into Githyanki castles)
What are some Gods that we would like to see nixed and Why?
I vote for half the nature gods there are way to many of them.
Eldath, Milekki(Spelling?), Oghama, Chantea, plus half a dozen I can't name seem to be filling the same roles repetitively. Plus considering the Druid population that worships "Nature" why are there so many of these deities? It should be survival of the fittest no?
What God or gods would you get rid of? or have gotten rid of in you campaigns?
|
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 07 Oct 2008 : 18:36:33
I've been collecting all kinds of lore about the gods of Faerun and inserting my own home brewed stuff amidst it to really make religion more front and center in my campaign without it being all about this god or that god. I love what you're talking about with the cultural stuff, but sadly found very little to aid me in the specifics. The original Faiths & Avatars books (2nd edition) are a great groundwork to start from, but there's just not enough regional information in circulation. At best, we get the location of a major temple or two, but I'd love to know which gods are more prevalent in what areas... and where worship of "local gods" exists, how it differs from the main pantheon stuff, and where some gods just aren't worshipped even though the pantheon as a whole may be be active in that area.
I'd also love to have more information about religious practices, beliefs, day-to-day activity, etc... especially in how they may vary from region to region and how temples in different regions get along with each other.
Currently, I've put my diety stuff on hold to flesh out the fiendish influence more. The devils have cults that can have clerics, but right now I'm on a roll working with demons. I didn't want to treat them the same as devils but with a chaotic alignment, so I did my homework (through various editions of D&D and 3rd party sources) to flesh out prominent figures in the Abyss and what kind of "sin" or power they're typically associated with... and have been creating vestige style game mechanics for them. Devilish cults are structured and have clerics like other religions... demonic cults are more freeform and cult leaders use the Binder class (Tome of Magic) to tap into demonic power directly. |
| BlackAce |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 21:30:38
Y'know this topic has stirred my creative juices again.
One of the things that's been kicking around in my head for years was a restructuring of the Faerunian gods. Not a paring down or a purge but I've always wanted the gods to be tied in less with generic portfolios and more into a cultural background within FR.
The idea that there's a Netherese pantheon, a Chondathan pantheon, an Illuskan pantheon, a Calishite(elemental) pantheon and a Mulan pantheon, plus several monotheisms... and that each has history and cultural baggage from those roots, appeals to me.
I'd have to throw away some lore to do it but one day I think I'll sit down and layout how I want deities to be fluffed in my Realms.
|
| Jakk |
Posted - 03 Oct 2008 : 05:09:40
I think I understand what Nerfed is saying here, largely because I feel mostly the same way. We have introduced change in the Realms in our campaign over the years... just not the Realms-shattering "change for the sake of change" that has been so popular since the Time of Troubles introduced 2nd edition. The only good change is change that serves a purpose that is desired by a majority of those affected by it. I agree with Nerfed that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" and that any good change that is made to something that is already good does not change the nature of the thing; better is still good.
Sage: If you're adding something new without first testing or checking to see if it will be good or bad, then yes, you will have to change other things. If you do your homework to begin with, making sure that the added thing will properly relate to the existing framework and in a good way, then no great changes (read: RSEs) are necessary. I suspect that what happened with 4e development is that the core rules team and the Eberron team got together and said, "Yeah! These changes will be great! Now... How do we shoehorn them into the Realms?" Yes, I'm probably being overly paranoid and bitter, but it just has that feel about it to me. Of course, the Realms team had every opportunity to put the dragonborn, tieflings, and genasi over in Anchorome and/or Katashaka, but they decided that it would be more fun to blow up Faerun instead. I would have loved FR 4e if they had put these new races and cultures in "new" (previously undeveloped) geographical areas on Toril, but by blowing up the world the way they did, they basically eliminated all possible relevance the 4e Realms could have to my current campaign and to my group. We would have been interested in crossing the Trackless Sea to explore new lands and civilizations, and in fact we still will be, but it won't be with the aid of anything published by Wizards of the Coast. I'll be adding most of what I just posted here to my response to another scroll; it's actually more relevant there. |
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 03 Oct 2008 : 02:53:39
Shhhhh.
(whispers): I get that... I'm just sticking to my "change sucks" story by not acknowledging any change that is good as being change at all. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 03 Oct 2008 : 02:48:27
But you've added something new to the material. And by doing so, you're likely going to have to change other things in order for the new element to properly relate with pre-existing material. |
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 03 Oct 2008 : 02:36:50
You're reading too much into it.
I'm looking at it from more of a big picture perspective... for example, if you make changes to something good and its still good afterwards, then nothing's changed in my opinion. More good is just added goodness, not different goodness.  |
| The Sage |
Posted - 03 Oct 2008 : 02:32:09
quote:
Originally posted by Nerfed2Hell
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Sometimes change is good.
Nope, change always sucks.
If you had something good and there seems to be a change and it seems to be good... then there was no change.
I'm not sure I follow what you mean here.
A change is a change, regardless of whether it's good or bad. If you change something and it improves a situation, it is still a change, regardless. You've added/modified something new/existing. Just as if you change something and it makes the situation worse. It's still a change because something has, again, been added/modified. |
| Christopher_Rowe |
Posted - 03 Oct 2008 : 02:19:38
quote:
Originally posted by Nerfed2Hell
Nope, change always sucks.
Wow!
|
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 03 Oct 2008 : 01:56:50
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Sometimes change is good.
Nope, change always sucks.
If you had something good and there seems to be a change and it seems to be good... then there was no change. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 02 Oct 2008 : 14:10:36
I was just saying. |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 01 Oct 2008 : 23:26:47
Change can indeed be for the better, but this change, the world cataclysmic event that has transpired is like a nuclear holocaust. Like the Terminator movies... That kind of change so sudden... well I just cant find the good in it! |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 01 Oct 2008 : 15:07:39
Sometimes change is good. |
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 01 Oct 2008 : 14:13:50
The new 4e FR setting is definitely not the Realms anymore, and does indeed bear more resemblance to a tabletop WoW than D&D. In 20 years, those WoW fanatics will probably have fond remembrances of 4th edition while griping about D&D 6.5e and the completely godless Forgotten Realms where techno-magic reigns supreme.
Change is inevitable. Change also sucks, but still inevitable.  |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 01 Oct 2008 : 10:45:59
I shall... Sorry! |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 30 Sep 2008 : 12:53:48
To me it seems as if most of the scribes in here have somthing against the new realms and I can understand why. Personally i hate it. Killing Mystra on her home plane, where she is the strongest, and considering that Azuth also resides there... come on Well they might pull some of the wow players they might not, but it seems that they just want to make a game that anyone can play and thats fine, but destroying a realm most of us were brought up in I feel is just Fu..ed up! Also the classes... when anyone can use magic... well who saind WoW??? I guess, that soon we will se and expansion calle "wrath of the whatever"
It no longer Dungeons and Dragons, its tabletop World of Warcraft and that sucks ... 
Mod Edit: Watch the language please. |
| Jakk |
Posted - 30 Sep 2008 : 05:30:35
With the changes that *were* made in 4E, both in the pantheon and elsewhere, they could just as easily have trimmed the entire pantheon down to two: Moander and Waukeen seem to be the gods who were being heard by the people making the design decisions, and they didn't even bring Moander back. Of course, they also made Asmodeus a god in the core rules and in the Realms, so maybe *that* is where their inspiration was coming from... 
And it strikes me as odd that they killed off *every* god of magic. But perhaps not so odd, when you consider what was done to arcane spellcasters in the core rules. A class as pathetic as 4E wizard can't possibly have any gods backing it up. 
Anyway, just my thoughts on a game system I'll never play and a version of the Realms I'll never play in. Hopefully somebody will have fun with what they've created; it would be nice if there's a 5th edition sometime... hopefully soon... with lots of retcon goodness...  |
| The Sage |
Posted - 25 Sep 2008 : 02:05:58
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Just want to point out that Moander is not entirely dead.
Indeed. There's a nice follow-up to what Moander is up to in Powers of Faerūn; it builds on Realmslore from Volo's Guide to the Dalelands -- see the section on "Tsornyl."
|
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 24 Sep 2008 : 23:04:03
quote:
Originally posted by Nerfed2Hell
Is any god ever truly entirely dead?
Perhaps not. |
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 24 Sep 2008 : 19:43:01
Is any god ever truly entirely dead? |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 24 Sep 2008 : 19:30:33
Just want to point out that Moander is not entirely dead. |
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 24 Sep 2008 : 16:01:31
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
I think we should be careful assigning 'Primordial'-status to this and/or that deity. Maybe it's just me... but something like that should still be pretty rare, to better reflect the "few Primordials who remain on Toril."
Sounds like a reasonable idea, but assigning Primordial status to a dead god here and there probably shouldn't impact things overmuch. |
| Foxhelm |
Posted - 24 Sep 2008 : 01:19:31
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
I think we should be careful assigning 'Primordial'-status to this and/or that deity. Maybe it's just me... but something like that should still be pretty rare, to better reflect the "few Primordials who remain on Toril."
Or he could be what happens when a Deity and a Primordial do the nasty? Like an abomination turned into a divine thing of chaos. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 24 Sep 2008 : 01:07:26
I think we should be careful assigning 'Primordial'-status to this and/or that deity. Maybe it's just me... but something like that should still be pretty rare, to better reflect the "few Primordials who remain on Toril." |
| Foxhelm |
Posted - 23 Sep 2008 : 23:40:13
quote:
Originally posted by Nilus Reynard
Garagos needs to go. Tempus needs to step up and take care of him, needs to assume his portfolio, even if he doesn't like those aspects of war that Garagos stands for. And if he does not have the stones do it, then perhaps Tempus is the one that needs to take the cut. When following a god of war, you need to be sure he rules over ALL aspects of war, not just the one he is comfortable with.
And of the all the deities that I could think to bring back, Moander is the one that stands forth in my mind. He was a god of unapproachable, unreasoning evil. A perfect counter to the greater dieties of good. Of all the gods, his avatar The Abomination, was perhaps one of the more frightening "creatures" that the Realms has produced. A giant compost pile, the size of a mountain, with exceptional intelligence, intent on your death.
Once again, just my opinion.
An interesting idea... what if Moander was not in truth a god? What if he was a Primordial, it fits more with the character seen in the Finder Stone Novels as something inhuman, alien, and madness inducing. He also existed extradimensionally. What if the Primordial aspect of Moander remained on Abeir and returned when the Spellplague hit? What if it is looking to merge with it's divine form to create a stronger creature?
Thoughts? |
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 23 Sep 2008 : 19:56:25
Back in 2nd edition, a DM I played under made made the major antagonist of our long-running campaign an anti-paladin (was a fighter who dual-classed into priest) of Loviatar. We hated him more than all of the nastiness in Undermountain. I'd say the best part was how he was role-played in combat encounters... as long as he wasn't in danger of being overwhelmed, he'd vocalize his enjoyment at being struck by spell or sword. He didn't get really, really angry until a later encounter where someone's cleric used charm person or mammal on him and convinced him that healing his wounds was for the best. The pleasant sensations repulsed him and drove him off for awhile... then we learned to stop catering to his desire to be hurt and started using non-lethal means to subdue or drive him away. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 23 Sep 2008 : 15:50:56
quote:
Originally posted by Ardashir
Truthfully, considering that she (Loviatar) numbers both Talona and Shar among her enemies, I'd like to see how to handle neutral or even "evil, but on our side" Loviatans in play.
Are you up for reading a novel? Maiden of Pain has a LN priestess of Loviatar for a protagonist. |
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 23 Sep 2008 : 13:24:45
I like the abundance of gods in FR. I think the people that feel there are way too many just look at the long list and roll their eyes at the idea of a hundred or more temples in every city. I enjoy how different regions hold different dieties in high regard and ignore others outright. Sure, its become one gigantic pantheon merged together from 4 or more and as a whole covers a significant area of land... but its not over done, some people just over emphasize the size alone and don't consider the more subtle intent.
I don't think any gods should die or be killed off... they should only be forgotten until such a time as they are useful again. |
| Nilus Reynard |
Posted - 23 Sep 2008 : 12:07:30
Garagos needs to go. Tempus needs to step up and take care of him, needs to assume his portfolio, even if he doesn't like those aspects of war that Garagos stands for. And if he does not have the stones do it, then perhaps Tempus is the one that needs to take the cut. When following a god of war, you need to be sure he rules over ALL aspects of war, not just the one he is comfortable with.
And of the all the deities that I could think to bring back, Moander is the one that stands forth in my mind. He was a god of unapproachable, unreasoning evil. A perfect counter to the greater dieties of good. Of all the gods, his avatar The Abomination, was perhaps one of the more frightening "creatures" that the Realms has produced. A giant compost pile, the size of a mountain, with exceptional intelligence, intent on your death.
Once again, just my opinion. |
| Ardashir |
Posted - 23 Sep 2008 : 01:15:06
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Very good points, but there is a bondage/SM element to Loviatar's worship, too (to be fair, though, it's probably just played up over other elements of her church by fans because it's "kinky").
Truthfully, considering that she (Loviatar) numbers both Talona and Shar among her enemies, I'd like to see how to handle neutral or even "evil, but on our side" Loviatans in play.
(My characters usually wind up facing the Mother of Plagues and Lady of Night and their schemes at various points. Be nice to have some help for a change!) |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 21 Jul 2008 : 17:43:37
quote:
Originally posted by DorianAdricus
As for the actual intent of this thread, I'd also like to go on record as saying that there should be a "live and let live" philosophy to the gods. I think they should all be there for everyone to use or discard as they will. Minimalist approaches don't do anyone any good in the long run.
Totally agreed, as I see it that was something that was always meant to apply to the Realms. |
