How hard is it to write pantheons people care about?

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Fri Dec 30, 2011 1:49 am

Actually, if one uses Discworld's consensual reality model, there is some room, because the instant there's a difference of opinion, there's a god that fulfils the heresy.

Libertad · Post by **Libertad** » Fri Dec 30, 2011 7:09 am

Swordslinger wrote:
In standard D&D religions you won't have too many varying opinions because whenever there's a dispute, you can quite literally just ask the god himself, assuming the god doesn't decide to come down and tell you (or simply cut off your spells for going against his wishes). There's really no room for inter religion ideological debates in D&D.

D&D deities can get funny when devotees can directly interact with them. In the Forgotten Realms, there's an Elf supremacist group whose goal is to destroy humanity. They know that Corellon Larethian disagrees with their ideology, yet they hope that they can sway their patron deity to their way of thinking. You never hear something like this happening in the real world. "Maybe if I explain to God the righteousness of my cause, then perhaps he'll hop on board my genocidal crusade!"

Xur · Post by **Xur** » Sat Dec 31, 2011 2:48 pm

Libertad wrote: D&D deities can get funny when devotees can directly interact with them. In the Forgotten Realms, there's an Elf supremacist group whose goal is to destroy humanity. They know that Corellon Larethian disagrees with their ideology, yet they hope that they can sway their patron deity to their way of thinking. You never hear something like this happening in the real world. "Maybe if I explain to God the righteousness of my cause, then perhaps he'll hop on board my genocidal crusade!"

Well, Forgetable Realms is probably as silly as you can get with a pantheon of gods. I imagine Ed Greenwood and friends tried to imitate greek mythology with their gods walking the earth and doing weird things, but I always had severe problems in taking this even remotely serious.

And players going to a god in person to talk stuff is totally a common theme in FR, but no one can match Elminster whispering horny things into a goddesses' ear and bend her to his will.

nockermensch · Post by **nockermensch** » Fri Jan 06, 2012 6:02 pm

Xur wrote: And players going to a god in person to talk stuff is totally a common theme in FR, but no one can match Elminster whispering horny things into a goddesses' ear and bend her to his penis.

I think I corrected your misspelling, Xur.

About the gods, I loved the discussion here. I agree that gods like shown in D&D completely mess with a lot of assumptions you have about churches and faith. I don't have an opinion if D&D-land is better or worse than our current understanding of how RL works* but what's certain is that D&D-land can't have the kind of "corrupt church" plots and characters that made for some interesting stories.

* I think it'd be hilarious if after death there's actually an angry Anubis waiting for you

If I was writing a setting and wished to have RL "faith" on it, I'd go with something like:
the afterlife under the gods at the outer planes is only temporary. After X months/years, souls disappear from the outer planes and no normal/epic/divine magic can reach them after that. Any god has a word about what happens with the souls after this disappearance: Some will say that the souls ascend to a place of even higher rewards, others that the souls return to reincarnate, others that the souls dissolve into the very fabric of the universe, etc. There's vague anedoctal evidence to support reincarnation here and there (ie: people with vague memories of "past lives") but then again there's no way to determine magically what's really happening other than CoP and asking a god, who'll say what he wants, anyway.
This would preserve at least one important aspect of RL Faith into the game.

To allow for church corruption and still have gods actually sitting in their thrones of clouds (thunderbolts twitching in hand) is more complicated and I'm not sure if it's actually doable.

BearsAreBrown · Post by **BearsAreBrown** » Fri Jan 06, 2012 6:12 pm

@nockermensch, you broke the quote tag.

@Everyone else, what's wrong with straight ripping realexisting pantheons?

nockermensch · Post by **nockermensch** » Fri Jan 06, 2012 6:13 pm

BearsAreBrown wrote:@nockermensch, you broke the quote tag.

@Everyone else, what's wrong with straight ripping realexisting pantheons?

Ninja corrected, but thanks anyway. Getting used with board posting.

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Fri Jan 06, 2012 6:48 pm

nockermensch wrote:If I was writing a setting and wished to have RL "faith" on it...

I've toyed around with the idea of creating an agnostic setting, where people believe all sorts of things about religion, but none of them are provable. You'd even have different pantheons by region and arcanists claiming they get their powers form the divine, but no one would really know for sure.

DSMatticus · Post by **DSMatticus** » Fri Jan 06, 2012 7:49 pm

RobbyPants wrote:
nockermensch wrote:If I was writing a setting and wished to have RL "faith" on it...
I've toyed around with the idea of creating an agnostic setting, where people believe all sorts of things about religion, but none of them are provable. You'd even have different pantheons by region and arcanists claiming they get their powers form the divine, but no one would really know for sure.

That's how I usually do it. Nobody really has any verifiable explanation for their magic powers, but a bunch of religious organizations have popped up around the idea of divine magic and that's the conventional association. Everyone's experiences with their pantheon are subjective and unverifiable, and people who make the more extreme claims about visions and deities whispering in their ear are either denounced as crazy, heretics, false prophets, or well-established members of the religious community who can get away with it. Occasionally, you even get people who claim to be related to their pantheon in some way, and receive varying degrees of success. And there are no ways to tell the difference between deceit, self-delusion, and reality.

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Fri Jan 06, 2012 8:40 pm

DSMatticus wrote:
RobbyPants wrote:
nockermensch wrote:If I was writing a setting and wished to have RL "faith" on it...
I've toyed around with the idea of creating an agnostic setting, where people believe all sorts of things about religion, but none of them are provable. You'd even have different pantheons by region and arcanists claiming they get their powers form the divine, but no one would really know for sure.
That's how I usually do it. Nobody really has any verifiable explanation for their magic powers, but a bunch of religious organizations have popped up around the idea of divine magic and that's the conventional association. Everyone's experiences with their pantheon are subjective and unverifiable, and people who make the more extreme claims about visions and deities whispering in their ear are either denounced as crazy, heretics, false prophets, or well-established members of the religious community who can get away with it. Occasionally, you even get people who claim to be related to their pantheon in some way, and receive varying degrees of success. And there are no ways to tell the difference between deceit, self-delusion, and reality.

I also like the potential for corrupt church plots and overall doubt that can be seeded into the campaign.

PoliteNewb · Post by **PoliteNewb** » Fri Jan 06, 2012 8:46 pm

Libertad wrote:You never hear something like this happening in the real world. "Maybe if I explain to God the righteousness of my cause, then perhaps he'll hop on board my genocidal crusade!"

1.) Most real-world religions posit omnipotent gods who expect YOU to change your mind to suit them. "God is eternal and unchanging" is a pretty common tenet among monotheistic religions.

I don't know of many (currently practiced) real world religions that posit fallable, powerful (but not all-powerful) gods.

2.) Most people in favor of genocidal crusades think it looks better for them if they claim they're doing God's work, rather than just seeking his approval. Lets them duck responsibility and serves as an appeal to authority for why they're right.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sat Jan 07, 2012 8:14 am

I don't know of many (currently practiced) real world religions that posit fallable, powerful (but not all-powerful) gods.

Taoism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Shinto, Mormonism, most animist faiths, and so on.

Only slightly more than half of the people in the world believe in a religion that has infallible gods as a core tenet. And a majority of those people do not believe that every word of their own religion is true.

-Username17

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Jan 07, 2012 8:18 am

So far as I'm aware, Taoism and Buddhism don't actually have gods, per se... I'm going to assume I'm wrong, since you usually only talk about things you know about, so um, what?

Winnah · Post by **Winnah** » Sat Jan 07, 2012 8:27 am

Daoism and Buddhism come in a lot of different flavours and there are sometimes elements of both that are featured in various belief systems.

Some popular Daoist gods

Various Bodhisattvahs and their mantras

edit:that there

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Sat Jan 07, 2012 8:29 am

Buddhism and Hinduism get blended together sometimes, too.

So far as I know, the Mormon God is supposed to be all powerful.

PoliteNewb · Post by **PoliteNewb** » Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:02 am

FrankTrollman wrote:
I don't know of many (currently practiced) real world religions that posit fallable, powerful (but not all-powerful) gods.
Taoism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Shinto, Mormonism, most animist faiths, and so on.

Only slightly more than half of the people in the world believe in a religion that has infallible gods as a core tenet. And a majority of those people do not believe that every word of their own religion is true.

-Username17

Okay, I apparently fail comparative theology. *shrug* I did say I don't know of many, not that they don't exist. Apparently I was merely professing my ignorance, not making a point.