Warning: ~2400 word post. Don't hurt yourselves.

~~~~~~Deities suck... or do they?~~~~~~

At least- the way we are being told to think about them does.

I intend to explain in detail how the balance of Gods and Mortals can/should/could be perceived as. And if you've the will-power to read this entire thing, I would like to hear your thoughts on the matter. I am ignoring Simplicity, and I am ignoring the white washed explanations given by wotc. Rather, I'm looking at this setting as if it were a real place, and intend to investigate how such a place would logically function in tandem with itself. (non-self-destructive)

• ~~~~~~Deities as Incomplete Beings~~~~~~

  One deity cannot be used to explain the myriad of human activities. In fact, nearly every god is required in a complete character in some way. I'm sorry, but as it stands with most people having mainly one god is bland as hell. Faerunian Deities are all fragments of what it means to be human- and when they are forced to be the whole, or quite nearly so- of an entire character, the world flattens. It loses some of its potential. Faerun doesn't need to be this way. After looking over some of Eds previous statements- it isn't. Or isn't Quite.

  I understand that the Dms say the Gods are physical real beings. Well, to be honest- they aren't quite. They are on another plane. That is far from Super Awesome mage-beings teleporting around the primordial throwing their fists around. So they are in some way indirect. They are real. But- They are most definently an abstraction. Ilmater is the god of Suffering, Healing, Kindness- Those emotions are human. That is why they exist in the human pantheon. (which he does). Ilmater is not a person with expansive motives and a drive to do something before he dies- he is a representation of that feeling, motivation, or action in humanity. He exists only in those aspects of divinity- that is why he cannot change over time, no matter what happens to him. He is the portfolios he is in control over. The more people that have those feelings- the stronger the god is- because he exists in those actions.

• ~~~~~~The World vs. the Hero Factor~~~~~~

  This is a game setting built for the human players- not a a locked playground for the divine gods. That is why Ao limits the Gods to stand for only what they represent- a fragment of humanity. When players are told to pick a god, and act like that god- they are told to try not to be all-human, try to be only a flat character. That is not productive for stories- it however, does provide us with PvP targets instead Role-playing characters.

  This type of action is prevailing in D&D. It happens everywhere. Goblins cannot be nice to anything- so they can be killed without moral implications. Chaotic Evil Dragons are always the same big lizards meant for destruction! Good needs to be cheered for! People are evil and unredemable! Paladins ftw! Thats D&D for ya. Everyone is the hero, yada yada yada. D&D and Wotc will do whatever they can to flatten the game world- so that this Hero has obvious targets to slay and become more heroic. (I'd rather a real story with tough decisions)

  This can be helpful for a light weight hack-and-slash game, but alienates story when it is expanded beyond the tabletop and into a persistent world. When things are simplified they hinder the minute details and moral complications and alterior motives that can run rampant in any good story. I know we'll likely never change completely- but for this topic, please -Dont- consider this as a comprehensive suggestion for the server. The point is, If one were writing about the balance of the Realms, instead of D&D, things would be different then we see them now.

• ~~~~~~What are Deities then?~~~~~~

  In order to move our concept on Deities beyond the black and white murderer vs saint attitude. I think we need to consider the Deities as what they are. The Deities are aspects of humanity. In the Realms physics and science takes a back-step to magic. Why? Because there is some innate fantasy that we have about magic, some type of romance in the ideas behind it. Some may acknowledge it more then others. But the idea of spells and magic is not something foreign or human myths throughout our history- so it is most certainly a human dream. Magic in the realms is brought out and into the limelight- most cities dont have much of it, but it exists- and it changes the world. Parts of the continent are shaped by it, in place of what we understand to be tectonics and physics.

  In this same spirit of dramatization, Deities were created as more real and direct. They are not some potential, they are real, and undeniable. But then they were created incomplete, relying on each others existence even though they may be directly opposing. They were given power but, Everything not related to this was taken from them. Deities are slaves to their power. They cannot avoid it, they cannot turn against it, they cannot be human; Despite the fact that -humanity- is what they represent. All the human parts of them are taken away, so they cannot miss it, cannot tire of it, so that they can become and remain as some thing more then mortal.

• ~~~~~~What do Deities want from mortals?~~~~~~

  If all I said so far is to be true. Then a Deity doesn't and cannot consider their followers individually. They do not think that way. They do not reply to their followers in words- for they do not comprehend the choices a mortal must make. Rather they inspire the feeling that Person is requesting, that source of inspiration. This feeling could be born within a prayer, or be born from a dramatic event in their lives. This person might then perceive this feeling in his own thoughts, which as inspired by the deity could also be considered to be of the deity. Thereby- this would be how a God speaks through mortals. The god doesn't reply directly because they exist in only part of the humanity of mortal men.

  For example. A Cleric of Bane is teaching those that come to him- about how to control or channel their rage- how to avoid destruction of self or others- and to instead use that hate and build something from it. During this someone who came to the cleric- continuously falters in their conviction- so the cleric of bane- so infuriated at the mans whining- that they call upon their deity to force the man to his knees.This is not done as an act of conversion. But as an act of proof. The Cleric wont likely murder the man, but he will breed divine fear in him and send him packing. That man does fear the cleric- but even more he fears the deity that he personally felt. When clerics act as if they are their deity on this plane- rather then a human devoted to teaching of them- then they remove this divine fear. And instead they themselves become a mortal and smite-able agent. They then represent a way to attack the god through the man. That gives the opposition wings.

  Deities want to be represented in men. If its bane- then the more people in control, the more fear created, the more strife existing, the more people that act through bane. They could stand there and dennoucing Bane, but that doesn't mean shit; If they are acting in tandem to him, thus making his influence felt in the mortal plain. It's cleric of Bane's job is to connect the dots for others and to preach that these men are being lead with banes power. A cleric should not present themselves as an obvious tyrant. Instead it is in fact better for the cleric to use someone else's actions as proof- because then they have the freedom to inspire others to act like them. They aren't going to hide who they are, they just aren't going to be the targets of the many. If tyranny is resisted- it is much easier to act from the sidelines to then promote Bane's cause and attack the arguments of the faiths. You have a stronger platform to speak on. Clerics are medieval politicians, some being more personally enterprising then others.

  Clerics run churches, churches offer aid to those who want what the church represents. Churches lead cities when they are a theocracy, rarely otherwise for the reasons above. A church of bane might have contacts to the some positions of authority- and can offer people wanting help and showing promise to some others that learned to get their positions after learning how by the church. A church is stronger as an aspect of the community then an outwardly self promoting enity. Hide the facts behind words- The watch currently is an excellent example of people that inspire Bane or the appearance of such in the community. Even though they might act int he name of another god- it doesn't mean their acts will be perceived that way.

• ~~~~~~What do mortals need from Deities?~~~~~~

  One doesn't chose their patron, any more then they choose who they are. But in living, each man or woman will un-doubtably have experiences with every deity on a personal level.

  Here is a quick run down, it is by no means exclusive. Some normal guy falls in love with a girl, maybe it took moments, maybe months, but no matter how he was brought together with her- their love is a prayer to Sune. Because they realize this, they may even choose to offer a prayer to Sune while staring into each other eyes. Even if they don't, Sune is there. ALone they may even offer a prayer to Tymora, thanking her for bringing them together in what ever chance way it was that they met. Perhaps they ask for luck with having a child as well. In either case- any time a mortal thinks of luck- they offer a prayer to Tymora.

  Perhaps their first child died, and through them into darkness- uncertainty. They may pray for Sune to bring them back together- or pray to Besheba to lift her curse of them. Maybe they may consider suicide or go into a depression- that which is a prayer to Shar. By chance they may make it out of the situation together- And in Lanthander's name they try again and are successful. They are then bound again by their love.

  Even a Cleric of Tempus may treat the above in the same way. Asking for guidance or temperance from any Deity is not evil, nor wrong, nor even uncommon. It is in some ways required- because even by commenting on anything unrelated to your god is an expression of something else, therefore a bringing to existence the influence of another god. A cleric teaches their deity- they are not him. They are full. They are human. LIke anyone else. And even though they may treat the abstraction of their deity as absolute- they must acknowledge the existence of the others- else they would feel no love, no hate, no lust, no desire, no despair, only that emotion that they serve. This is unrealistic and is thusly passed over as an option by me.

  A god represents a sphere of influnce, Anytime a mortal enters that sphere they bring that deity into this realm. Just as when they cast a spell it is Mystra that comes. When they draw blades to feel the rush of battle and the invigoration of the hard-fought battle, then it is a Prayer to Tempus. When they need that competitive edge to establish control over a situation despite the costs, It is a Prayer to Bane. When they need to lie, it is a Prayer to Cyric. When they tell a misleading truth or choose to keep an object taken, then it is a prayer to Mask. When death comes, each offer a prayer to kelemvor to aid them in their passing. When vengence is needed, Hoar. When the law is corrupt, Tyr. When the malicious need thwarted Torm.

  Etc... Etc... Etc...

  Saying a prayer to an evil deity is not wholey corrupting. It is human! It is undeniably a fact of life, and can often be necessary- even for the good guys. EVEN FOR CLERICS OF ANOTHER GOD. If they live such every day- then they will be consumed by the greed or lust it represents. By living you give praise. By living you create influence. And to live- you must draw on all that it human from time to time. You can't help it.

  The fact of the matter is- No person can be just one of those things, for no one diety (even for a cleric) can be there for them at all times in their life. When someone chooses to take on the mantle of a Cleric- they do so as a representive of their faith- but firstly also a human one. With faults and weaknesses. They choose to teach or inspire a certain motive or emotion in the men around then- for by changing how people look at the world, they spread their deaties touch- even if the men do not willingly name it as such. However- on a personal level a cleric may ask for help from any deity, so long as they do not teach or inspire that feeling to the rest of their community. Clerics must teach one god- but may seek any aspect of humanity to balance themselves out.

• ~~~~~~Deities vs. Deities~~~~~~

  When they tell their clerics to act- it is not to demolish everything, or take over, it is to attempt to make more people feel that emotion- the one that of the deity represents. This brings up their influence and increases their power. In effect, churches that promote the opposite are always at war, locked into a political struggle over the atmosphere of the populace. Thereby- they fight. And they do not destroy the city they're trying to bring their god to.

  Basically, Deities need influence, I would relate it to an addiction. Sort've a high that gives them power. Then of course they fight each other physically to gain portfolios. Which is the aspect of humanity that they are active among. So they want more of this drug by claiming more range of faith. Humans cannot kill gods- (Unless Ao strips them of their divinity) any more then they can kill their races ability to feel or think in a certain way.

• ~~~~~~The Afterlife~~~~~~

  The details of the afterlife is fishy at best. We know We go first to Kelemvor who spilts people into three categories. Faithful, Unfaithful, and Faithless.

  Most people do not have a clerics outward limitation. Thereby, their patron is the god they served and payed the most to during their life. It it judged by the gods when they die. And cannot often be chosen correctly ahead of time. At the time of death, the person standing there- and the amount of each bit of humanity that was fed through their live will be evident to those that -are- that piece of humanity.

  Faithful of a god are not zealots, they are men lacking or wishing more of what that god represents. Clerics are there to teach them how to get it.

  These are easy enough to determine using the above as true.

  1. Whenever a character chooses to deny the gods completely, ignoring their existence, refusing to submit to any- then they go to the wall.
  2. If a god is given power through your actions, then by living you grant certain gods favoritism over others. The more devoted to who you are- the more obvious the god you'll end up with. The strong your faith in yourself, the more pure your soul. People in the Realms do not chose their patron- they earn it.
  3. If a Cleric of a deity betrays them- then they get canned with the unfaithful. The Unfaithful in normal men are those that in the end betray everything they ever stood for. In your living acts, exist deities, the more of certain acts, the more influencial certain deities, thus by betraying yourself- you betray them.

Thats my random-topic rant of the month, tune in next time for- ~Ebok's ridiculously long rant #2!

Please forgive the haphazard nature of my reply, I kind of address each paragraph independently as I go. Please note I rarely refer to humans.

Deities aren't all respresentations of an aspect of humanity - many are aspects of nature or the functioning of the multiverse. Not all of them have a place in the lives of certain humans. Tyranny and strife, for example, are things that followers of free-spirited or nurturing deities do not condone.

Maybe not all deities can be connected to every happening in one's life, but that's looking at it backwards. The ideal cleric's life should be reduced to the ways and teachings of their patron deity. It's silly to think that a typical mortal, other than maybe another divine caster or maybe a monk, would try to do this.

The gods are real, physical beings that can be attacked (likely without success, although it's happened!) and they were very recently forced to live on Toril (~16 years ago in our setting). Elminster is probably a match for a lesser deity or two, and he's very material, chilling in hot springs with lady Drow and stuff.

Ilmater has motives. He wants to ease the suffering of creation and show it the benefits of kindness. His clerics are expected to further this agenda. If and when Ilmater dies (5.72 Edition, I hear) his portfolio will likely pass to another deity, which will either put their own spin on how to uphold the portfolio, or corrupt the portfolio into something selfish. Finder adapted Moander's porfolio into something good; Bane, Bhaal and Myrkul took Jergal's neutral porfolio and exploited their full evil potential.

Deities themselves can change what they stand for, and change alignments. Their portfolios are lost, stolen, acquired or shifted. Their power doesn't necessarily come from the presence of a thing in the multiverse, but active revering of a particular power for a particular thing. Mortals, for example, have a choice between praising Valkur or begging mercy from Umberlee; shouting GARAGOS or asking the blessing of Tempus before a battle; seeking the wonders of Ilmater or Talona during plague. The deities often conflict with each other because there are opposing yet similar aspects of their portfolio being uphold by other deities.

When clerics and other divine casters choose to represent a god, they choose to further that agenda, to increase the power of their god and to work against enemies of the faith.

Normal mortals only need to have made a conscious decision to worship a particular god over the others. Their patron is more like an idol, something they'd like to emulate or represent, but lack the dedication for whatever perfectly mortal reason. They aren't prohibited from offering praise even occasionally to their patron's enemies.

Goblins can be nice; usually to further their own secret (or not-so-secret) objectives. Dragons aren't always chaotic! And there's a whole color scheme of good ones, too.

Good people are fallable and often jerks; evil people can be the sweetest folks you meet, and are indeed salvagable. As long as Ed Greenwood's still writing stuff, D&D will be sufficiently fucked up.

The gods don't have their humanity stripped when they ascend; there are pantheons that aren't even human to begin with. A few of the major deities are elementals or from places beyond the typical Forgotten Realms multiverse. The ones who were mortal certainly have to adjust to their duties, but they adapt while bringing some new things to the table.

The gods are certainly capable of replying with words, but most often in visions (in which there can be words) - but being individuals themselves, reserve such things for very important clerics, paladins or druids of the faith!

Banites would be worse than Matt Foley at motivational speaking...

They don't often need to care about being represented; storms can happen without Umberlee putting it in a carefully planned daily 'minder. What they care about is being recognized as responsible for something. I can't remember which two, but one of the deities of fury is not very pleased that her superior is taking credit for her own "work", as this diminishes her power.

As stated, mortals choose their patrons - often with strong influence from their parents or community, but conversion is always possible (at least, for non-divine casters). Very few mortals ever have any direct contact with a deity while alive; more likely they'll be introduced to a deity and what they represent through a cleric or priest; if it can be afforded, they might even receive a blessing channeled through the cleric. The cleric is the divine middle-man; now that the Time of Troubles is over and the deities could go away again, clerics are the mouthpiece of the gods on Toril.

Thinking about luck is not a prayer to Tymora - she's not the only luck god by a longshot. Thinking about good luck isn't a prayer either; knowingly praising Tymora for good fortune might count (maybe even non-verbally, but recognizing Tymora as a real entity has to be in there somewhere).

It's entirely possible for a person to mistake a natural phenomena as the acts of the incorrect god; some gods promote this, such as in the Deities of Fury example. It can be somewhat devastating for deities like Shaundakul, who Beshaba brings ill-fortune in the name of among the Bedine.

Mortal experiences don't bring a deity into existence or expand their realm of influence - deities, like some kind of cosmic parasite, need mortals for sustainence. If you live a carefree, pleasant life, Shar very well exists; maybe her agents haven't gotten to you, but maybe you're just another speck in the world, and she's got better things to do for now.

It can be very difficult to reduce your purpose to that of a single deity; it's why you start out as lowbies, even for clerics. You need to learn and grow, and so low-level clerics can get some slack. When you start to earn more of your deity's power, you're expected to be more like them - or at least act more like them. It's part of why Torm's devout try to find the city he lived in as a mortal!

High level clerics have a really hard job. For many, it consumes them to their death. For Grigor Starag, it meant turning himself into stone.

Not all deities represent abstract concepts like "inventiveness" or "love". Most represent actual things that can be touched, measured or written, like laws, rocks, the moon, fire and unicorns.

Some deities (though not their clergy) avoid open conflict; for example, Tempus does not want to face Garagos, because if he kills him, he has to somehow manage the unrestrained bloodlust Garagos upholds. Some deities get lucky breaks and can turn Rot into Creation through Change or some BS like that.

Mortals can and have killed gods, without Ao's consent. It's very difficult, beyond 99.999...% of the population, but not impossible. By the same token, mortals are very capable of controlling what they feel or how they respond (even on a physical level); monks probably being the best example. For a typical low-level character, this is likely going to be difficult.

When people die, they wait for their patron to send someone to get them, if they chose a patron. And yes, they chose. If they weren't very faithful to their chose, they could be waiting a long time - or forever. Faithful don't have to be perfect representations of their god's ideals, but they shouldn't have intentionally and repeatedly against against their selected patron (or, they should have converted!)

Again, the deities exist, whether you even believe in them or not; Malar exists even if you don't hunt, Lurue exists (and how I wish it wasn't true) whether or not you even know what a unicorn is, Auril exists even if you live in the desert, and Bane exists even if you live in a peaceful, democratic farming community with food a'plenty.

Most mortals wouldn't recognize a lot the limitations and shortcomings of the deities, simply due to not being as informed as us (we're such awful metagamers), but here's basically what a decently-informed commoner might know:

• There are gods; they're powerful, especially when it comes to certain things; like Urdlen with dire moles and Eldath with waterfalls.
• The gods might improve success or decrease failure if you praise them / beg mercy when in their domain; it's best not to try tempting their wrath.
• You should pray at least semi-regularly to a (real) deity and try not to piss them off, or the afterlife is gonna be PRET-ty boring (or even dangerous).

Dude, I'm not reading that. Anyone want to summarize in like, five sentences? Thanks!

-Garem|lazy

First i would have to say that this actually enlightened certain aspects of D&D for me, and has, I think, given me more ideas on how to run a D&D game. it also made it easier to sit through this meeting.

Garem: Right after i finish the cliff notes version of einstiens collective works.

Ebok: I agree with most of the points made, except the gods unchanging nature. The gods are portrayed, much as the polytheistic civilizations gods, as almost mortal in mind. The best examples, in my opinion, and Jergal and Bane. Jergal was, at his youth, Vicious. His enemy's fell, his lies were spread, and he was overall evil. As he aged, he mellowed out a bit. Went from "you will all die by my hand" to "you will all die, but hey, you have a place determined to die. I wont modify that". As his oppionions changed slowly away from CE, he had little use of the domains he no longer supported. So, when confronted by the 3 inheritance gods, he was willing to give them it. In my opinion, it was by choice he didnt smite them, not by threat. Now, bane is another example of a changing personality. At first, he was shyly meligant. But, after Bhaal stooped acting as the main antagionast of the FR, he warmed to the waters and started acting more on his evil.

In response to Garem:

Gods pwn. Mortals r teh lose. Ed Greenwood fucks things up. Clerics are uber, but the more uber they become the better the chance is they will pwn themselves.

And uh... when you die it's like getting put on layaway until your god feels like picking you up.

Hammer: I was conceeding to the changing of deities over time after ScottyB's post as well. So I overstepped my point in that regard. But I am glad you enjoyed the read. Someone else needs to condense it. >_>

I was doing a loose referral to the fact that while a deity is limited to their portfolio- they can each represent it differently. Deities have been smacked by Ao for changing beyond their portfolios in the past. And Deities like Tempus don't want the portfolio of slaughter- because that would change them. In otherwords, A deity cannot have a portfolio, and not represent it.

Garem: Eh, sorry. I gave warning! Dont listen to Semli ! Semli: Not even close!

ScottyB: ::Edit:: Deities gain power when their portfolio interacts within the world. Whether that be an abstract human feeling, or a physical event, even fi they are not acknowledged.

A Deity's portfolio is all encompassing of the things within it.

A Deity doesn't gain power if their name is attributed to something they have no portfolio in.

A High level cleric should not be self destructive, he should understand how his deity touches society, and wise enough to represent that and further it along. (this is the point I'm most firm on, if necessary I'll do another essay describing why and how the current way is self deprivating to the cleric, the society, and the influence of the deity. Just look at the lack of our Cleric of stone. Now the church might as well not exist. [sarcasim] He did the church a BIG favor turning to stone and whatnot. [/sarcasim] :P

Goblins are monsters. They can be not truly be anything more. That is how humans will view them and screw any rational on the subject of goblin society and its logical diversity and internal functions. They were created like this on purpose- so that people could kill them without regret. True D&D style. this was an example of D&D simplifing things beyond story potential. Ed often hates against these very incarnations. Thank heavens.

Deities get power for representing human ideals, or things humans involve themselves with, or in some cases personify. Deities need this power- some more then others. The more bound to humans, the more like humans the will appeal to be, however they are bound first to their portfolios. And those portfolios have been around as long as the things they represent- no matter whose hands it may have been in.

The only difference between my death system and the current- would be that a deity would know when a mortal died carrying allot of their influence within them, instead of the mortal being forced to make that choice- especially since you think that a human would not know the primary deities of his race. Which the Greeks could handle easily- and those were even less real. Deities like being praised- then it would stand to reaosn that they would spread myths around that would accomplish such.

I would think that deities would be intelligent to know that they don't need all their followers now- that if they ingrain their faith within a society slowly, it will become more prevasive and unstoppable then if they tried to force the ideal change now and found it resisted.

~Ebok

As much as I loved this, and skimmed through it at times, I have to point out that there are a few things that I noticed that seemed kind of off to me.

I understand that the Dms say the Gods are physical real beings. Well, to be honest- they aren't quite.

It's true. On both sides. Gods are physical, real beings, just as some DM might say. But only in the loosest sense of the term. They have bodies. Corporeal manifestations. Many also have multiple manifestations, aspects, and bodies. I would say that their senses are as far above a human's as a human is above an ant, but that's not quite right. They are to humans as a human of superior physical and mental capability would be to a dumb, deaf, blind ant. But while they may represent an abstraction, they are not, in fact, that abstraction, just it's personification

lmater is not a person with expansive motives and a drive to do something before he dies- he is a representation of that feeling, motivation, or action in humanity.

He represents all of that, yes. But he does have expansive motives, as well as a drive to do something before he dies. Gods die. They know that. They have some sense of their own mortality.

He exists only in those aspects of divinity- that is why he cannot change over time, no matter what happens to him.

He can change over time. In fact, gods do often change over time, even without an external influence acting on them.

In the Realms physics and science takes a back-step to magic.

As silly and flexible as they often are, magic does in the realms does tend to act in accord with certain rules. It has it's limits. Fuck with those, and bad things happen. Look at Karsus. Or all the other archmages who've fucked things up because of their belief that magic doesn't have limits or rules. It does.

All the human parts of them are taken away, so they cannot miss it, cannot tire of it, so that they can become and remain as some thing more then mortal.

When considering the Faerunian Pantheon, I find it best to think of the Greeks. Their gods were, undeniably, human. And while the great variety of races and beings in the setting means that a number of gods are far more removed from Humans than others, those of the Human pantheon can be counted upon to maintain some semblance of humanity. They can miss it and can most certainly tire of it. One of the reasons they change over time. If you wish an example, I would provide Jergal. Once a deity who controlled some of the most evil portfolios in existence, he gave up his station, and retired to a nice corner office.

If all I said so far is to be true. Then a Deity doesn't and cannot consider their followers individually. They do not think that way. They do not reply to their followers in words- for they do not comprehend the choices a mortal must make.

Gods often can and do think of their followers individually. I'd imagine that is at the core of the entire idea of Gods having Chosen. Gods do speak to their followers individually, and often think that way. They've been known to provide explicit instructions to their followers, and succumb to the same fates as mortals.

One doesn't chose their patron, any more then they choose who they are.

Bad Faith. But let's open the existential can of worms.

When they tell their clerics to act- it is not to demolish everything, or take over, it is to attempt to make more people feel that emotion- the one that of the deity represents.

And if those two things happen to fall in line with one another? Garagos? Talos?

And they do not destroy the city they're trying to bring their god to.

So they want more of this drug by claiming more range of faith.

While gods do, in fact, need faith, I wouldn't relate it so directly to an addiction. My personal take on it is that it is a matter of sustenance. And a number of gods are perfectly happy with their base of faith remaining a constant, without growth. Some of them are even content with less than that, such as some of the elemental deities.

Humans cannot kill gods- (Unless Ao strips them of their divinity) any more then they can kill their races ability to feel or think in a certain way.

Humans can and have killed gods without any mention of Ao's intervention. Bane, Bhaal, and Myrkul did just that. And I don't think Finder had Ao's permission while wrecking Moander, although I could be mistaken. And as for killing their race's ability to feel or think in a certain way, I would even go so far as to say that there -is- some established precedent for such immense change amongst mortal races. Drow and Duergar are the most prominent examples that I can think of at the moment, although it's open to debate.

But again, that's just my take on some of this. That in mind, you've still got a great point, and I think you're right. Gods, religion, faith, and the whole shebang can be a lot more than they are currently. And I appreciate the BA random-topic rant. <3

It's a very well thought-out and interesting post, but it's also very inaccurate in many parts. Good read, though!

Granted there are numerous falicies involved in my basic outline, although I'm still not so sure the way things work currently- really work at all. Mosy deities dont want to destroy their following-base, they want to see their elemental or whatnot in play. I'm just a little flabbergasted that Deities tend to hurt themselves so much in the long run. They are -immortal- from any aging standpoint. Granted some havent lived long enough to really know that- and looking at 4th [cough]crap*[/cough] edition, they wont ever have that chance.

I'm preaty sure all the gods killed that were named were either killed through the unlimited potential of magic- now facing restrictions by mystra; Or were killed during the time of troubles- when deities were forced to be non-abstract and mortal so that they could survive to 3rd edition D&D. Mosy of the time, Gods are damned near unkillable- and they can easily see it coming once that adventurer hits the 25+ level mark. <_<.

Otherwise I'd just be disspointed with the limits of the system- and the starkness it has to be preceived with. Takes the fun out of it for me. :/

Please don't mention 4e. I'd rather blind myself to it's existence. As for the Gods being killed, I'm not sure the list of those killed by Bane, Bhaal, and Myrkul (as mortals) had anything to do with that. As for anything else, I can't really say. In all fairness, it hasn't been a long time since the Time of Troubles ended, and most of the gods have been a lot more careful since.

I'm just a little flabbergasted that Deities tend to hurt themselves so much in the long run. They are -immortal- from any aging standpoint.

As for this, well... Again, deities are ultimately human. Or, rather, have some human traits, just elevated to the level of the gods. Lust, greed, jealousy, the ability to be deceived, hate, etc. And like Nietzsche said, "Against boredom even gods struggle in vain."

Executive Summary:

Gods are changing. Ed messes things up. No one, not even us, can agree on how to interpret them.

Read my above post, and have fun.

Mithril Dragon As for this, well... Again, deities are ultimately human. Or, rather, have some human traits, just elevated to the level of the gods. Lust, greed, jealousy, the ability to be deceived, hate, etc. And like Nietzsche said, "Against boredom even gods struggle in vain."

~Ebok

Moral ambiguity is difficult to achieve in a game where morality is definitively black and white.

To be honest, I think you're thinking of the gods in far too modern of terms. Whenever I first started reading anything on the Faerunian pantheon, it wasn't with modern, relatively abstract religion in mind. It was with what we commonly call mythology.

Even the term "Pantheon" is evocative of the Greeks. Look at the gods of Faerun as a superstitious Greek would view his gods, only with a lot more physical manifestations of apparent to prove their existence. The Norse, Greek, Egyptians. Their gods were ultimately human. They acted in ways that were human, only on a grander scale. They were basically super-powered humans.

Zeus was not an altogether abstract being. He was a horny old man sitting on the top of a mountain who threw lightning at people who pissed him off, ruled over his semi-inbred family, and occasionally shagged women in the form of varying forms of poultry. While he was tied to abstractions, you could still count on him to be a dirty old man.

Greek gods were morally ambiguous. ... Rather, they were all so packed full of errors that they made most normal people look good. Greeks were not forced to worship any deity over any other. Most Greeks only worshiped the gods to appease them. Those gods did not fracture the society into near continuous warfare.

All of this, leaves our focus on humanity, which is a breeding ground for stories. Whereas, Faerun's interpretation leaves us with nearly every answer clear cut.

I understand how faerun works. I am not talking about how faerun does work. My whole point was to bring up an alternative view that would/could/should inspire much more truth to the world.

Faerun's current system is designed for adventurers on a hack and slash mission to glory without moral obligation. Its a hero setting. Hero settings suck when moved to a persistent world. No one hero exists. Therefore- in order to allow story to exist- we are forced to blur the line between good and evil. Otherwise people playing evil characters would be playing them for no other reason then to get killed representing a challenge to the "heros".

This is dull and gets old preaty quick. Therefore, I am theorizing on ways to consider the realms pantheons as something ambiguous. So that no one side is always right, and you can never truely fight for only one side. That would inspire more people to do things for themselves, which is what all the interesting/complete characters from EFU have been doing anyway. I'm just pondering ways to enlarge the potential, and avoid the pitfalls.

Personally, I believe that black and white elements are unnecessary to the world or the system. And in fact hinder it when the world grows beyond the main character.

~Ebok

Greeks were not forced to worship any deity over any other. Most Greeks only worshiped the gods to appease them. Those gods did not fracture the society into near continuous warfare.

That's not true. Not entirely, at least. There were lots of reasons Greeks worshiped their gods. And those gods did, occasionally, fracture the society into continuous warfare. Granted, that was mostly in old stories they told, but there was some precedent what with Sparta and Athens, and all. Plus it's only an example. The Faerunian pantheon bears more semblance to this than to modern, vague, abstract religion.

Faerun's current system is designed for adventurers on a hack and slash mission to glory without moral obligation.

Hack and slash does not denote the utter lack of moral obligation.

Its a hero setting. Hero settings suck when moved to a persistent world. No one hero exists. Therefore- in order to allow story to exist- we are forced to blur the line between good and evil. Otherwise people playing evil characters would be playing them for no other reason then to get killed representing a challenge to the "heros".

Sure, it's a hero setting, if you want to call it that. "Hero" does not denote any specific alignment. Heroes rape, kill, plunder, loot, massacre, slaughter, spite the gods, and do all sorts of nasty things. It's just a matter of perspective. Evil characters can be the heroes as easily as the good guys. Again, I'll reference Bane, Bhaal, and Myrkul. They did the same things that a number of good aligned individuals did and in doing so became legends and gods. Evil heroes, right there.

This is dull and gets old preaty quick. Therefore, I am theorizing on ways to consider the realms pantheons as something ambiguous. So that no one side is always right, and you can never truely fight for only one side. That would inspire more people to do things for themselves, which is what all the interesting/complete characters from EFU have been doing anyway.

It's only dull if you let it be. There's nothing wrong with fighting for one side, doing work for something greater than yourself, or all of that good stuff. Not all interesting/complete characters have done things for themselves. A number of them have done things for other people, institutions, beings, or moral grounds. And not all characters who do things for themselves are interesting/complete.

Personally, I believe that black and white elements are unnecessary to the world or the system.

Sadly, black and white elements are just that. They are elements. The elements that stand at the core of the world and system. You would meet with as much success in removing them from the world as you would have in removing the flour from a cake after you bake it (Thank you Voyager). They're at it's core.

This is time you could be spending debating the nature of the real God.

:?

Too late.

Ebok Its a hero setting. Hero settings suck when moved to a persistent world. No one hero exists. Therefore- in order to allow story to exist- we are forced to blur the line between good and evil. Otherwise people playing evil characters would be playing them for no other reason then to get killed representing a challenge to the "heros".

Sure, it's a hero setting, if you want to call it that. "Hero" does not denote any specific alignment. Heroes rape, kill, plunder, loot, massacre, slaughter, spite the gods, and do all sorts of nasty things. It's just a matter of perspective. Evil characters can be the heroes as easily as the good guys. Again, I'll reference Bane, Bhaal, and Myrkul. They did the same things that a number of good aligned individuals did and in doing so became legends and gods. Evil heroes, right there.

~Ebok

Most of what you listed, lighthearted hack and slash, moral quandries, individuals with depth failing- I'm sorry, but it seems like it's more of a problem with characters, not with the deities. I've seen plenty of characters with depth who've come quite a long way, and accomplished a lot. I've seen lots of people for whom things were subjective, even if Good and Evil isn't in the end. Just because the conflict between knowing what to do, what's right and wrong, and moral ambiguousness of it all isn't visible does not mean that it's not there.

Without abstraction- You are either right or wrong- always. You either stand for this- or that- or fail. It is impossible that a Tyrran can be a Tyrant in the eyes of people (if they tend towards a darker grey) And not feel more like bane to them. Opinions have to be subjective, we're human- therefore portfolios that divinely represent these opinions cannot be black and white.

It's not impossible for a Tyrran to be a tyrant in the eyes of the people. Similar things have been done IG and canon. Helmites have raped the landscape of Maztica. During the ToT, the High Priest of Torm used Assassins devoted to Bhaal to eliminate those judged heretics. People have died IG not for their objective alignment, but for the subjective view that other characters have held of them. Opinions are subjective as far as mortals are concerned. Just because Good and Evil are objectively defined doesn't mean that individual characters have to -know- that. Even those who communicate directly with the gods cannot, in the end, be entirely certain if they're right or wrong. They're still listening to the words of beings just as biased as they are. Even Paladins who are told by the Gods who's Evil can still have doubt, as even the Gods can and have been wrong. The deities -are- subjective. They -are- imperfect. They're like that -because- they are human.

Sure, in the end, it's not subjective. In the end, it's all black and white. That doesn't mean it you have to treat it like that. That doesn't mean you have to be boring. It can be as interesting as people decide to make it.