| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
 Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 03:03:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
^I understand that deities are a mystery, but what's the point of being so vague? If that's to give the illusion that many deities are back, it won't cut it since people who play d&d can easily use any god they wish in their campaign. If they used the lack of info ''trick'', it would be the same as saying ''X IS DEAD'', because the support would be null anyway and interesting stories would remain brutally interrupted. Also, too much vagueness is annoying.
As it has been said countless times (and as it is obvious), the Realms are yours to use and yada yada...
It's interesting you say that, because YES, the Realms is meant to be altered and changed and what not, but at the same time, you and I both know that people get tied into knots over "BUT IT'S NOT CANON!" even though "THIS CANON DOESN'T WORK FOR ME ANYWAY!"
I would much rather see WotC leave it up to DMs. Rather than *definitively stating* that a deity is dead, just say that deity has vanished from popular worship, and let DMs pick them up if they want, or ignore them if they don't. That way, we can all say "my Realms follows the canon!" and be happy.
quote:
The reason I -personally- absolutely want some deities back (I've already named them before) is that it opens up possibilities of development to their and their followers' stories which I wish to enjoy again (and because WotC chose to remove many of them from canon in a really weak way).
What's stopping you from doing that, if the Realms are yours to shape as you wish?
Is it because some sourcebook says a particular god is gone?
See the canon pressure?
quote:
Also, I'm wondering if people at WotC really read/care about what it is said here...
They do. They absolutely do. Do you not see Eric Boyd, George Krashos, and myself commenting here? We may be freelancers, but we're all written Realms stuff in the past. And maybe in the future. Who knows?
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
 |
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 05:52:10
|
And Steven, and Matt, and Brian, and Brian, and ED (how the hell did you forget HIM?), etc, etc
I think, friend Irennan, we have accomplished FAR MORE then you know. 
Give it a week or two - perhaps you will change your mind. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
The Hidden Lord
Learned Scribe
148 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 06:44:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I think, friend Irennan, we have accomplished FAR MORE then you know.
Give it a week or two - perhaps you will change your mind.
Yep, proven a new addage true, conveyed to me by an editor and 'continuity cop' of a successful gaming franchise; " We could put a $50 bill in every $30 sourcebook, and the fans would still complain."
Incessantly. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 08:52:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
[quote]What's stopping you from doing that, if the Realms are yours to shape as you wish?
Is it because some sourcebook says a particular god is gone?
See the canon pressure?
I think you're missing the point.
I don't think Irennan was talking about his personal game.
He was talking about the Realms in general.
Vagueness is a bad idea. What's the point of purchasing an already expensive sourcebook if it doesn't provide lore details a DM (and players) can use?
|
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3821 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 10:13:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
What's stopping you from doing that, if the Realms are yours to shape as you wish?
Is it because some sourcebook says a particular god is gone?
See the canon pressure?
I think you're missing the point.
I don't think Irennan was talking about his personal game.
He was talking about the Realms in general.
Vagueness is a bad idea. What's the point of purchasing an already expensive sourcebook if it doesn't provide lore details a DM (and players) can use?
Yes. If I could run a game in the Realms, all of the deities I like would be there. There's nothing that would stop me from having them alive and kicking. It's just natural. So, there's no canon pressure.
As Jeremy said, I'm talking about the setting itself. And vagueness to give the delusion that gods are still there while their story is not going to receive any new support or development in any way is a bad idea. Either they are back in some form in the published setting, or they're not (they don't have to be all-powerful gods, exarchs/archfeys will do it. What matters is that they and what they stand for comes back to the Realms).
That said, writing that a deity isn't worshiped with the same frequency as before, rather than writing he/she's dead seems to be a good idea. Still, you get my point: if he/she is going to have not even the slightest weight in Realms matters, then for ''practical'' purposes he/she could be not there and it'd be the same.
However, saying that there's a core pantheon surrounded a swirling sea of raising and falling less powerful beings is waaay too vague to be of any help.
quote:
They do. They absolutely do. Do you not see Eric Boyd, George Krashos, and myself commenting here? We may be freelancers, but we're all written Realms stuff in the past. And maybe in the future. Who knows?
Yes, I've seen you all on these forums. However (and sadly) freelancers only have so much pull on what's going to happen. The ''official'' people have the final say on it, and their decisions have already left me perplex and ''saddened'' in the past.
quote:
And Steven, and Matt, and Brian, and Brian, and ED (how the hell did you forget HIM?), etc, etc
I think, friend Irennan, we have accomplished FAR MORE then you know.
Give it a week or two - perhaps you will change your mind.
I've not forgotten them at all D:
I've explained what I meant some lines above. That said, I truly hope to be going to change my mind in a couple weeks... |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 05 Aug 2012 10:51:05 |
|
|
|
see
Learned Scribe
235 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 10:50:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Question for the week: If you could have ONE god back, who would it be and why?
I'd say Leira, but she never went away, she was merely occluded for a while. (Ao told the greater gods that she was dead? They can be sure was Ao telling the truth, because why? Maybe Ao lied, maybe they were faked out by Leira herself, exercising her own portfolio against them.) If she had gone away, there would be two reasons to bring her back. The first is that lies and deception, which are a part of pretty much every form of social interaction between sapient beings ever, should not be the domain of the psychopath god. The second is, the machinations of the Guardian of Liars reinforces the uncertainty with which mortals must view the divine. Who in Faerun can ever be sure that churches and clerics actually correspond to actual deities, if the Lady of the Mists might be at play? Even those who might trust Torm to tell the truth as he sees it cannot be sure that Torm has not been deceived . . . or even that Torm is aught but a mask of the Mistshadow. |
|
|
|
see
Learned Scribe
235 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 11:36:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
However, saying that there's a core pantheon surrounded a swirling sea of raising and falling less powerful beings is waaay too vague to be of any help.
Actually, we don't need a pantheon detailed at all.
What needs to be detailed is the churches and the clerics. We don't actually need to know whether a Church of Bhaal the All-Slayer is worshiping a god who was never actually slain, an exarch of Bane, Cyric in disguise, a devil who has stolen the name of a dead god, or a figment of their own imaginations (but the clerics are getting empowered by Tempus because he finds them a tactically-useful tool). We just need to know how the church works (including what it believes) and what its clerics can do.
So, I wouldn't have a deity list at all, but a major churches list, with acknowledgement there are all sorts of other isolated churches and cults and whatever. Are Amaunator and Lathander the same deity? As of 14?? DR, the powerful, Faerun-wide Church of Amaunator says they are. The smaller church of Lathander centered around their main temple in ?????? says the current Amaunator is a usurper who used the name of a dead deity to steal most of Lathander's church. Amaunator's followers say that the Lathanderites are sadly mistaken people whose clergy might be empowered by Selune out of pity, or maybe are servants of Shar deliberately corrupting followers of the light. |
|
|
|
Tarlyn
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 13:01:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Question for the week: If you could have ONE god back, who would it be and why?
Mystra, she is the most iconic deity in Realms. Mystra's relationship to magic in Toril is a defining feature of the setting and makes Realms magic stand out from the other classic fantasy settings(Greyhawk and Dragonlance). I am fine with a slightly less powerful and active Mystra, but I don't want to see her become a Boccob type deity of magic.
Simbul becoming the new Mystra would be fine. I think if that is the case, she should begin to use Mystra as her name. However, I would rather see Mystra be reborn from one of her early incarnations.
I prefer Elminster as an NPC rather than the new lord of spells. I could see him as magister. Elminster is to much of a mettler to make a good deity, especially if the goal is to have the deities make less personal appearances in the mortal realm. |
Tarlyn Embersun |
|
|
|
Portella
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
247 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 15:38:20
|
Mystra hands down, then followed by Lathander I would also make an Adventure just like the one released during the times of trouble to rescue Waukeen from the Abyss. But instead to save someone like Mystra or a different deity.
She seems to be on her way back, anyhow just sorry for her as she seems to die a lot, Simbul as Mystra or what ever it seems would be a good twist as Elminster would have even more reason to be "in love" with his godess and most importantly I would hope her hot temper would give her Mystra persona more of a bite.
|
Purple you say?!
|
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 15:52:15
|
As a DM, truthfully it doesn't matter to me about canon. I use it, but I don't depend on it.
Yet, I still get upset when they make sweeping changes to the Forgotten Realms, and that includes its presentation. This has nothing to do with D&D - I am a fan of the setting itself, and therein lies the rub.
So while I don't understand at all why RPGers get upset (because if you like the 1e Realms, just friggin' use it), I do understand why FR fans (which includes all of us here) get bent out of shape about stuff.
Which deities they kill or bring back doesn't really matter to me as a gamer, but it may 'turn me off' to reading certain novels, or buying certain sourcebooks. If I don't care for the subject-matter, I am not going to waste my money on it.
So as far as gods go, I have everything I need. I always have, even before FR became an official setting and I started running it (the last FR campaign I ran my son had a cleric of Kord, because when he created his character, he picked his deity out of the PHB). As far as being a Realms fan is concerned, I am pretty sick of 'FR novels' (and I use that term loosely) taking place off of Toril. If the novel is about 'the gods', then as far as I am concerned it is a Planescape novel, and it has very little bearing on the setting I am a fan of. I pretty much avoid novels about deities (this may stem from reading the Avatar trilogy).
So I suppose I am of the camp of 'ambiguous deific lore', because I am going to come to my own decisions regardless (the 'canon shackles' never got delivered to MY house). Deities have very little (direct) impact on most folks games - its their priests that are important. That's where we need more detail. It doesn't matter if the god itself is dead or alive, or if the cult is 'doing it wrong' (a heresy), what matters are the people who believe what they believe, and what interesting things I (as a DM) and the writers (both source & novel) do with them.
Take the Cult of the Amalgamation, for instance. There are no gods involved in that, AFAIK. I don't recall if the cult itself thought there was an affiliation (Malar, perhaps?), because it had no bearing what-so-ever on their storyline.
The Realms should be about people, not gods. Deities are like swords and wands - just tools to keep the plots moving along. When they become the focus, then the reader looses all connection to the story - how do you identify with a god? (unless you are a lunatic)
So PLEASE, no more 'god books'. Give us a tome on the Cults & Religions of the Realms. Thats something we can sink our teeth into. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 05 Aug 2012 15:54:23 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 16:06:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Vagueness is a bad idea. What's the point of purchasing an already expensive sourcebook if it doesn't provide lore details a DM (and players) can use?
Well, I absolutely think that a lore sourcebook can still be incredibly useful without declaring (to a level of textbook accuracy) the exact status of deities. The Eberron books manage just fine, and no one's sure their deities even exist.
I'm not saying that the gods shouldn't be developed or discussed in the lorebooks--I'm saying they should get much less focus. We shouldn't be talking about how the death of such-and-such deity "breaks" the setting, like we did with Mystra. The deities are important, sure, but I'd like to see the focus fall on the mortals, rather than the gods.
quote:
As Jeremy said, I'm talking about the setting itself. And vagueness to give the delusion that gods are still there while their story is not going to receive any new support or development in any way is a bad idea. Either they are back in some form in the published setting, or they're not (they don't have to be all-powerful gods, exarchs/archfeys will do it. What matters is that they and what they stand for comes back to the Realms).
Who's to say it ever left? I think we've seen throughout 4e that development/novels have ignored or stepped back the concept that "dead" deities don't have any influence or are permanently dead. Mystra has been as active/discussed in the 4e novels as in any previous edition, and Ed's currently working on her current status. I'm working extensively with Helm. Etc.
What I'd really like to see is people getting less twisted up about the deities. As I said, they're important, but they shouldn't be the be-all and end-all of the setting.
quote:
However, saying that there's a core pantheon surrounded a swirling sea of raising and falling less powerful beings is waaay too vague to be of any help.
Ironically, that's exactly what was going on in the original Realms. Only with 3e, really, did we start democratizing the deities and saying with strict accuracy that "such-and-such deities exist." Ed's original intention was to have a core of popular deities plus hundreds if not thousands of minor/local/unknown deities.
quote:
Yes, I've seen you all on these forums. However (and sadly) freelancers only have so much pull on what's going to happen. The ''official'' people have the final say on it, and their decisions have already left me perplex and ''saddened'' in the past.
This is true, of course, but also you should not underestimate us or yourselves. It's a new era of the Realms, and all of us have a voice. You, the fans, me, my fellow freelancers, WotC, etc.
You'll see. 
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 16:37:20
|
Do I have any say? 
Please, no Ewoks or Jar-Jars.
Okay, maybe Ewoks... so long as they are cannibals. I draw the line at Jar-Jars.
And why haven't we ever read about FR's Wookies, the alaghi? Give them some love!
(Just don't let RAS near them)  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3821 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 16:44:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
quote:
As Jeremy said, I'm talking about the setting itself. And vagueness to give the delusion that gods are still there while their story is not going to receive any new support or development in any way is a bad idea. Either they are back in some form in the published setting, or they're not (they don't have to be all-powerful gods, exarchs/archfeys will do it. What matters is that they and what they stand for comes back to the Realms).
Who's to say it ever left? I think we've seen throughout 4e that development/novels have ignored or stepped back the concept that "dead" deities don't have any influence or are permanently dead. Mystra has been as active/discussed in the 4e novels as in any previous edition, and Ed's currently working on her current status. I'm working extensively with Helm. Etc.
What I'd really like to see is people getting less twisted up about the deities. As I said, they're important, but they shouldn't be the be-all and end-all of the setting.
Sure, I too want to see focus on mortals (as I wrote in other posts here) rather than their deities themselves. However, why not say that they are back in some form? While some deities have influence in 4e novels, other valid and peculiar ones have been completely ignored
(like Eilistraee and Vhaeraun. Yeah, I'm getting redundant here and I apologize, still they are a sensitive topic for me).
quote:
quote:
However, saying that there's a core pantheon surrounded a swirling sea of raising and falling less powerful beings is waaay too vague to be of any help.
Ironically, that's exactly what was going on in the original Realms. Only with 3e, really, did we start democratizing the deities and saying with strict accuracy that "such-and-such deities exist." Ed's original intention was to have a core of popular deities plus hundreds if not thousands of minor/local/unknown deities.
Yeah, but some of the minor (in power) deities have become very popular and -paradoxically- more flavorful than many of the greater ones (who are a bit streamlined, except Mystra. Sune, Sylvanus, Chauntea, Corellon, Selune etc... are all deities whose concepts are kinda common). So saying that these ones can possibly be in the swirling sea won't be satisfying at all, at least to me.
quote:
quote:
Yes, I've seen you all on these forums. However (and sadly) freelancers only have so much pull on what's going to happen. The ''official'' people have the final say on it, and their decisions have already left me perplex and ''saddened'' in the past.
This is true, of course, but also you should not underestimate us or yourselves. It's a new era of the Realms, and all of us have a voice. You, the fans, me, my fellow freelancers, WotC, etc.
You'll see.
Cheers
I really hope so. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 05 Aug 2012 17:05:35 |
|
|
|
Arcanus
Senior Scribe
485 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2012 : 22:33:57
|
| I like novels about the gods. Seems that those who play the realms want more lore on mortal life, trouble is, novels about powerfull entities sell a lot of books. |
|
|
|
Tarlyn
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 00:37:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
What I'd really like to see is people getting less twisted up about the deities. As I said, they're important, but they shouldn't be the be-all and end-all of the setting.
You did specifically ask us to comment on the deities. Also, it isn't like the change to 4e killed / marginalized one or two deities. Between merging, killing and not mentioning, the pantheon was significantly altered. Along with a host of other questionable changes. Also, in cases like Mystra, she represents more than just a deity, but also the way magic is viewed / used in the setting. IMO the same reaction would occur from fans if the one power exploded in the Wheel of Time setting, mass effect fields stopped working in the Mass Effect universe or the force dissolved in Star Wars.
quote:
Originally posted by Arcanus
I like novels about the gods. Seems that those who play the realms want more lore on mortal life, trouble is, novels about powerfull entities sell a lot of books.
The two big events that people tend to take issue with regarding the deities is the Time of Troubles and the 4e Realms changes. Both events were driven by a desire of the game design team to edit the world to fit core assumptions of D&D. For instance, Leira and Bhaal were killed because their classes would not longer exist in the 2ed PHB.
I don't think the root cause of the problem is having novels about the deities / powerful beings. IMO the root cause is the extremely poor management of such beings by the game design team. The easiest solution to the problem is to shift the focus away from those beings. Also, no matter which deity is killed off, their is probably one person who really liked the deity. For instance, I personally think that the story behind Tyr's death was pretty lame. However, Tyr and Torm both did share a lot of overlap, so the death doesn't bother me. However, I imagine it really annoys someone else.
|
Tarlyn Embersun |
Edited by - Tarlyn on 06 Aug 2012 00:43:44 |
|
|
|
Arcanus
Senior Scribe
485 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 00:54:38
|
| What I really don't like is the way gods are sometimes portrayed as complete idiots, yet we are then told that they have clever and far reaching plans. Surely just being a god implies an intelligence far beyond the norm. |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 02:29:31
|
With the Spellplague, deities were pretty much shacking up to weather the storm. Sure we've seen things like so-and-so was subsumed by deity X for 4E. But with 5E coming out, I see no reason why we won't see the gods spread out again and go their own ways and rule their own domains again. Personally, I like Tyr and I think he's just encased in a block of solid hellfire awaiting release from his demonic captors. "He's dead Jim" just doesn't really apply to the Realm's gods. :)
I'm looking forward to the new article series by Ed, Forging the Realms. Makes a person wonder what we're gonna see. :) |
|
|
|
Aryalómë
Senior Scribe
USA
666 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 02:37:09
|
| One thing I hate is how the gods are so fragile. They can be killed so easily, it seems. In my opinion, gods should never be able to truly die. Their current state could be disrupted, but, over time, they could come back into their original selves. D&D just seems so weak... |
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 04:33:09
|
| Which deity(s) would I like to see back? Well, for me, that's pretty much a no-brainer, and I think those who've known me on here a while probably know which one(s). But I'll mention it anyway, just for those who don't- Eilistraee/Vaerhaun. I think the LP books gave both of them the shaft, in several ways. Yes, we NEED Mystra back, but it looks like Ed's already working on that one, so I'll leave him to it. But the deity-pruning should have been stopped LOONG ago. I honestly saw no point to it, and we lost a LOT of great deities because of that. ToT was bad enough (though personally, I sort of liked it), but the Spellplague mess just took away too much flavor from the Realms. Now we have "Realms-Lite", with half the claories, and NONE of the flavor. These "Dread Rings" seem to have drained more life from the Realms than we all thought! Or maybe that was just WoTC doing their best to imitate Szass Tam.... |
The Goddess is alive, and magic is afoot.
"Where Science ends, Magic begins" -Spiral, Uncanny X-Men #491
"You idiots! You've captured their STUNT doubles!" -Spaceballs
Lothir's character background/stats: http://forum.candlekeep.com/pop_profile.asp?mode=display&id=5469
My stories:
http://z3.invisionfree.com/Mickeys_Comic_Tavern/index.php?showforum=188
Lothir, courtesy of Sylinde (Deviant Art)/Luaxena (Chosen of Eilistraee)
http://sylinde.deviantart.com/#/d2z6e4u |
|
|
|
Arcanus
Senior Scribe
485 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 12:50:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alystra Illianniis
Which deity(s) would I like to see back? Well, for me, that's pretty much a no-brainer, and I think those who've known me on here a while probably know which one(s). But I'll mention it anyway, just for those who don't- Eilistraee/Vaerhaun. I think the LP books gave both of them the shaft, in several ways. Yes, we NEED Mystra back, but it looks like Ed's already working on that one, so I'll leave him to it. But the deity-pruning should have been stopped LOONG ago. I honestly saw no point to it, and we lost a LOT of great deities because of that. ToT was bad enough (though personally, I sort of liked it), but the Spellplague mess just took away too much flavor from the Realms. Now we have "Realms-Lite", with half the claories, and NONE of the flavor. These "Dread Rings" seem to have drained more life from the Realms than we all thought! Or maybe that was just WoTC doing their best to imitate Szass Tam....
Agreed. As mentioned before, "it's your realms, you can take what you want from it". Well that's fine, put things back to how they were and I'll do just. that. No point in making the pie with fewer ingredients, I'll still want the same size piece but I want more flavour, not less. |
|
|
|
Aryalómë
Senior Scribe
USA
666 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 13:12:11
|
I found some REALLY awesome new (well, old) deities for the Seldarine in the Dragon #236 yesterday. They were mainly for characters who wanted to play non good Elven priests, but they had so much to them! I'm definitely implementing them in my realms.
I'd like to see every deity back that was in the Realms prior to 3rd edition. However, I know that's going to be a bit impossible, so I'll give a list of the deities I wish to see make a return:
- The WHOLE Drow Pantheon
- Mystra
- Lathander
- I'd like to see the Earthmother as her own entity, rather than live as an aspect to Chauntea, or something like that.
Pretty much all of the deities that were killed off in 4e. I'd really love to see an interconnectedness of D&D worlds that 2e had. I want to see a lot of interloper deities; basically, I just want it to go all back to what it was before WotC got their hands on it. - I HATE that almost the entire Seldarine got turned into "aspects" of Faerunian deities. They completely butchered a pantheon that has been so long in the making.
I do like the idea of Archfey, however. I think that all of the Sylvan deities should actually be Archfey, as in real world lore, they fae do not have gods. In my personal fantasy setting, I have fae Kings and Queens that have god like power and are served by fae in their courts. Which court they were serving in (the servitor fae) during the time of their death determines where their shade will go in Annwn (my rendition of the Celtic (in Welsh lore, specifically) otherworld, which acts as a faerie afterlife). The place where their shade will go to is similar to the lands their court ruled in (though it's almost completely unknown, Annwn is). So it would be interesting to see the Archfey expanded upon a bit; maybe describe what their followers are like in the mortal world, describe any cults dedicated to them, what happens to a mortal's soul who worships them, etc. Also, I'd like to see a much less decidedly matriarchal take on the fae as well...
|
Edited by - Aryalómë on 06 Aug 2012 13:28:15 |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 17:28:23
|
dine the whole drow pantheon, whats her name the undead loving drow was an interloper and she's not dead just forgotten.
ditto on the seldarine got turned into aspects, they did that with the halfling one too which also blows
Chauntea is not yondala( if anything she would have been Sune) |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4487 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 19:16:19
|
@ Erendriel: how many deities were actually killed in the transition to 4E. There were a few, to be sure, but do we need Tyr back? I rather like Torm better and Bahamut in Torms place as the final piece of the triad. I like Amaunator's dogma and tactics than the seeming whimsical Lathander. Perhaps detail both so we can enjoy 2 aspects.
As for some other obscure deities, I'm under the impression that just because they weren't listed and described Doesn't mean they perished. In fact, I think only 2 deities got the "Aspect" treatment (Sehanine = Selûne, Talos = Gruumsh). |
Diffan's NPG Generator: FR NPC Generator
E6 Options: Epic 6 Campaign |
|
|
|
Aryalómë
Senior Scribe
USA
666 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 20:37:26
|
@sfdragon: It was Kiaransalee, who happened to be one of my absolute favourite deities of the drow. I think it is completely ridiculous what they did to her, of all. I don't think even High Magic should be able to erase a deity's name from all existence.
@Diffan: I'm not sure, but they left MANY deities unlisted in the campaign guide. It was suggested that these unlisted deities either became exarchs or lost their power completely; which I think is a total load of bull.
Hanali Celanil became an aspect of Sune and Aerdrie Faenya became an aspect of Akadi (which doesn't make ANY sense at all because Akadi in 4e was changed to be an Elemental Lord). Avachel also got the ax and became an aspect of Hlal.
I don't think that any deity is better suited for any job. One portfolio and domain shouldn't be exclusive to just one god/dess. In real world folklore, there are gods in the same pantheon with EXTREMELY similar domains (if they could be called that), so why should D&D be a watered down, simplified version?
|
|
|
|
Arcanus
Senior Scribe
485 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 21:08:03
|
quote:
so why should D&D be a watered down, simplified version?
it was said it was done to make it less complicated and less intimidating to those new to d&d. |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3821 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 21:41:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arcanus
quote:
so why should D&D be a watered down, simplified version?
it was said it was done to make it less complicated and less intimidating to those new to d&d.
Really? They could've presented the lore in a different way if accessibility was what they actually wished. Like making a core book with all the essential info about the FR (main areas/organizations/deities/plot hooks) and modules (oh wait...) with additional, not strictly necessary info about it, without destroying or streamlining anything, without turning away so many fans and customers. After all the ''the Realms are yours'' thingy is also valid in the sense that people can choose from the available options, not only in the sense that they can ignore events that destroyed something they like about the setting.
|
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 06 Aug 2012 22:03:36 |
|
|
|
Portella
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
247 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 22:43:54
|
| I don't know any more to be completely honest I am lost. I don't even know what to talk about any more... |
Purple you say?!
|
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 23:05:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
@ snip
As for some other obscure deities, I'm under the impression that just because they weren't listed and described Doesn't mean they perished. In fact, I think only 2 deities got the "Aspect" treatment (Sehanine = Selûne, Talos = Gruumsh).
and that never made since, I hated the: sehanine= Selune
yondalla = chautea( i hate chauntea)
hated that whats her name = sune
hated the whats her name fenya became akadi too..
hated the hole shoehorned of 4e's central lore that got shoehorned into the realms.
bah ignore me I'm ranting |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 23:22:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
quote:
However, saying that there's a core pantheon surrounded a swirling sea of raising and falling less powerful beings is waaay too vague to be of any help.
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Ironically, that's exactly what was going on in the original Realms. Only with 3e, really, did we start democratizing the deities and saying with strict accuracy that "such-and-such deities exist." Ed's original intention was to have a core of popular deities plus hundreds if not thousands of minor/local/unknown deities.
Yeah, but some of the minor (in power) deities have become very popular and -paradoxically- more flavorful than many of the greater ones (who are a bit streamlined, except Mystra. Sune, Sylvanus, Chauntea, Corellon, Selune etc... are all deities whose concepts are kinda common). So saying that these ones can possibly be in the swirling sea won't be satisfying at all, at least to me.
When I say "core pantheon," I don't mean "most powerful gods" in the setting. (Heck, the most powerful gods in the Realms may very well be completely unknown by humans or us, the audience.)
What I mean is the most iconic, flavorful, and well known gods. This is the list you show new players in the Realms looking to play a divine-powered character. These are the gods you look at and say "these ARE the Realms."
And no one say "all the gods are the Realms," because you know I agree with you. But do you see what I mean?
Some of them will be very powerful, yes, but some won't be. It's a list of about twenty, which comprises the most commonly worshipped/distinctive/coolest deities. But I've talked before about my idea for handling the presentation of gods in the setting.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2012 : 23:23:22
|
@SFD and combining deities: I wouldn't worry about all that.
Have we got through this topic? Shall I come up with a new question of the week?
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
One Canon, One Story, One Realms (5e) THE SEQUEL
