Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Davith Bothain 05-18-07, 06:41 PM	It's been a while since I've taken time to peruse the Eberron side of my shelf, but now that I have, it's come upon me to finish up that old character I'd been working on off and on. While his mechanical nature and backstory are more or less down pat, I come now to question the official validity of a key element of his ethos. In months previous, I had thought I read somewhere in Faiths of Eberron of a cult (or, at least, an excerpt from a "scholar" in the margins) that worships both the Sovereign Host and the Dark Six as if the Schism had never occurred. Now, however, I can find no such reference. Granted, I've yet to recommit myself to a cover-to-cover inspection of the tome, but I am hoping that someone with a sharper memory can recall if this item exists officially before I myself am forced to spend my hours (taxed enough as they are) combing through the text.
retillin 05-18-07, 06:49 PM	Is "Lesser Pantheons" what you are looking for? Page 28 FoE. It talks about how small sects worship just a hand full of both the Sovereign Host and the Dark Six. Just a thought, might be what you are looking for.
Davith Bothain 05-18-07, 07:11 PM	Yes, I did happen upon that in my search, though the cult I had in mind would worship all of the Sovereigns and the Six. Mayhap I saw this in times previous and expanded upon the theme...
Daydreamer 05-20-07, 04:48 AM	I know an ancient goblin tribe worshiped 16 gods, it was unusual for the host to reject a god, as normally they interpret all faiths into theres. perhaps that inclusive religion is what ur looking for?
retillin 05-20-07, 10:16 AM	Well the Host used to be called the 9, 6 and 1. But they never really allude to what that "1" is. I cant remember exactly where I read that. FoE I think, but I cant remember the page.
naturax 05-26-07, 07:39 AM	Well the Host used to be called the 9, 6 and 1. But they never really allude to what that "1" is. I cant remember exactly where I read that. FoE I think, but I cant remember the page. I think I read it in a Dragonshard somewhere - the goblins had 16 gods and all but 1 were incorporated into the faith of the Sovreign Host. The last was just too evil, or something, and there are rumours that followers still exist, etc. etc.
TheAnthroDM 05-26-07, 02:02 PM	I haven't seen anything on this besides the "Lesser Pantheon" but worshipping the all 15(or 16 if you accept the lost Goblin God) doesn't really seem that out there, I'd say it'd end up something like this: The United Fifteen Neutral The worship of both the Dark Six and the Sovereign Host is a simple on, combined these gods rule over all aspects of life, a Neutral Good worshiper might pray to Dol Arrah in battle, while at the same time, pray the Mockery will infect their enemy with treachery. Portfolio: Civilization, craft, growth, vengence, passion, plenty, destruction, community, justice, individuality, fear. Domains: Any Domain provided by a individual diety of the Dark Six or Sovereign Host. Favored Weapon: Longsword and Kama(Choose one if you have the war domain or similiar class feature that is effected by Diety's Favored Weapon)
BrotherDog 05-27-07, 08:19 AM	I think I read it in a Dragonshard somewhere - the goblins had 16 gods and all but 1 were incorporated into the faith of the Sovreign Host. The last was just too evil, or something, and there are rumours that followers still exist, etc. etc. How do you know that the missing one wasn't too goodly? In fact maybe the 16th one is the Traveller, as he doesn't fit into the Dark Six, and maybe the sixth dark-one just isn't named.
Neutronium_Dragon 05-27-07, 11:03 PM	The conventional SH and DS faithful already worship the collective fifteen to some degree; they simply have different views as to the proper place of each in their worship. The more significant difference between the faiths (as FoE talked about) is how they view the nature of divinity and a mortal's relationship to it, and that's what you'd have to resolve in trying to reconcile the two.
TheAnthroDM 05-28-07, 03:58 PM	Well the Host used to be called the 9, 6 and 1. But they never really allude to what that "1" is. I cant remember exactly where I read that. FoE I think, but I cant remember the page. Page 11 of FoE the little scroll sidebar that's titled Symbolism and Symbols. 9-6-1 Hmmm... what's the significance of that I wonder.
Edymnion 05-28-07, 05:58 PM	Well the Host used to be called the 9, 6 and 1. But they never really allude to what that "1" is.I thought they did? The 9 are the sovereign host, the 6 are the dark six (which includes the traveller), and the 1 was the unity of all fifteen working together. Although, it does open up the door for a lost/forgotten/dead god. Tharizdun (I think I spelled that right) from the Temple of Elemental Evil is a good candidate for if you wanted to put the ToEE into Eberron.
TheAnthroDM 05-29-07, 01:31 AM	I thought they did? The 9 are the sovereign host, the 6 are the dark six (which includes the traveller), and the 1 was the unity of all fifteen working together. Although, it does open up the door for a lost/forgotten/dead god. Tharizdun (I think I spelled that right) from the Temple of Elemental Evil is a good candidate for if you wanted to put the ToEE into Eberron. Tharizdun would make a perfect deity for the 1. Anyways. According to FoE what the 1 symbolizes is not concrete, while is could be the pantheon as a whole it could just as easily be a forgotten diety(though it's an unpopular belief) or even Eberron itself. Personally? I've never had a SH Cleric in my campaigns so I never bothered filling out the details.
ArcTan 05-29-07, 01:43 AM	I thought they did? The 9 are the sovereign host, the 6 are the dark six (which includes the traveller), and the 1 was the unity of all fifteen working together. PGtE says that there actually was a pantheon of 16 total gods in the Goblinoid Pantheon, but one god -- now known only as "The Overthrown" -- was completely eliminated by the first human settlers, for reasons unknown. He can only be identified by the fact that ancient temples can be found where his idols have been desecrated (a humanoid figure thrown from its altar with its features erased) and sacred relics destroyed. Although, it does open up the door for a lost/forgotten/dead god. Tharizdun (I think I spelled that right) from the Temple of Elemental Evil is a good candidate for if you wanted to put the ToEE into Eberron. Yeah, that was one of my thoughts, though I'd like The Overthrown to have been something a little more interesting than that. Though when I read the description of the vestige Amun in ToM, putting him in Eberron as The Overthrown was the first thing I thought of.
ArcTan 05-29-07, 01:53 AM	The conventional SH and DS faithful already worship the collective fifteen to some degree; they simply have different views as to the proper place of each in their worship. Specifically, the worship of the Dark Six isn't exactly what we call worship, for most people. It doesn't involve loving the Dark Six or being happy about the Dark Six or being on the Dark Six's side. It means giving the Dark Six what they want so they don't kill you. Which is, itself, a kind of "worship" and is *part* of the worship of any god whose followers take the idea of gods being powerful and active forces seriously. But in Eberron, worship of the Dark Six doesn't go beyond the part of worship called "propitiation" -- the part where you accept that, say, the cruelty and pain of war, or the random fury of natural disasters, or the lurking, ever-constant maw of death and decay, are real forces in the world, necessary in their way, worthy of your respect, and things you really hope will leave you alone. You give your offering, you pray and beg them to leave you alone, and you go about your business. Of course, every society has the sort of people who not only understand and respect forces like death, but *like* and *desire* and *want to fight on the side of* forces like death and decay and madness and destruction. Most people don't want to be their friends. But pantheons like the Sovereign Host have ready-made deities for them to identify with and worship, and for people to mentally classify them with so they can carefully avoid them. The fact that the Ghaal'dar goblinoids worshipped a pantheon of all 16 gods tells me that either the Dark Six weren't so obviously "dark" as they are now, that the goblinoid culture had a more well-rounded, less black-and-white understanding of forces like madness and death and war (that sometimes betrayals are necessary, sometimes a little chaos is good, sometimes death and disease are the most important part of the life cycle), or, probably, both.
BrotherDog 05-29-07, 08:33 PM	Specifically, the... ...betrayals are necessary, sometimes a little chaos is good, sometimes death and disease are the most important part of the life cycle), Why must peolpe make the hideously erroneous assumption that chaos isn't inherently good? This is very moronic to me. I'd also like to pont out that I'm not intending to single ArcTan out in this. I see this kind of lawful(and therefore usually evil/tyranny) intollerance toward chaos all over the place. Why is this LE attitude always so prevailant? Or is that just an anti-USA(freedom) attitude? 'Tis very, very sad..... ...and limiting.
Neutronium_Dragon 05-29-07, 11:23 PM	Frankly, I would hope that "the Overthrown" is something more original than just a "Sharn Inquisitive: Greyhawk god appears in Eberron - is Pelor next? Dol Arrah's priesthood refuses to comment!"-style watering down of the setting's uniqueness which importing Tharizdun would be. For that matter, what's to say that "the Overthrown" hasn't always been "the Overthrown" even when the goblinoid empire was at its height? Maybe that's the whole thrust of what it represents. Alternately, as was discussed in another thread a while back, the sixteenth god might have been a representation of some other Eberronian force (such as the Dreaming Dark); there're certainly plenty of menacing ones to go around. It could also have been (essentially) a god which represented Dhakaani nationalism. In either case, the Host types would've had good cause to want to wipe out all traces of it.
retillin 05-30-07, 12:46 AM	Why must peolpe make the hideously erroneous assumption that chaos isn't inherently good? This is very moronic to me. I'd also like to pont out that I'm not intending to single ArcTan out in this. I see this kind of lawful(and therefore usually evil/tyranny) intollerance toward chaos all over the place. Why is this LE attitude always so prevailant? Or is that just an anti-USA(freedom) attitude? 'Tis very, very sad..... ...and limiting. I understand what you are saying, but it's harks back to 1ed. Back in the good old days it's wasnt good vs evil. It was more law (good) vs chaos (evil). That was how Greyhawk was set up at first. And as for the "Overthrown", I really am stumped as to what to do with him in my campain. So I'll prolly just use it as a teaser that the PC just can not find out.
Edymnion 05-30-07, 12:27 PM	And as for the "Overthrown", I really am stumped as to what to do with him in my campain. So I'll prolly just use it as a teaser that the PC just can not find out.Which is a good thing. The PCs shouldn't be able to figure out the secrets of the universe. I don't care how much 3e subscribes to the "Yes you can do that, here's the hoops to jump through to make it possible" philosophy, sometimes the PCs simply cannot do something, no matter how hard they try.
Lurkalot 05-30-07, 02:43 PM	Why must peolpe make the hideously erroneous assumption that chaos isn't inherently good? This is very moronic to me. I'd also like to pont out that I'm not intending to single ArcTan out in this. I see this kind of lawful(and therefore usually evil/tyranny) intollerance toward chaos all over the place. Why is this LE attitude always so prevailant? Or is that just an anti-USA(freedom) attitude? 'Tis very, very sad..... ...and limiting. Because people are told this. The first thing any group in power does, is start preaching how good it is to keep things that way. Hence people start qualifying statements to the contrary. Perhaps?
Edymnion 05-30-07, 08:24 PM	Why must peolpe make the hideously erroneous assumption that chaos isn't inherently good?Because chaos cannot support large scale human life. Civilization by definition is lawful, it is the supression of the wild chaos of nature into a structured order by which "civilized" life can be conducted. You could not even FEED a nation without order, as agriculture is required, and chaos cannot produce enough food to feed millions of people, while ordered planting and harvesting can. Would *YOU* want to live in a world where you don't know where your next meal is coming from, where you will sleep tonight, or if your loved ones would come home? That is chaos.
TheAnthroDM 05-31-07, 03:19 AM	Enough with the Law Vs. Chaos debates. Also I would like to point out that USA a example of a chaotic culture.
Revvecor 05-31-07, 10:53 AM	This is the first time i have posted, Here is a Heretical thought the nine represents the 9 male gods, the six represents the 6 female gods(assuming the unknown god is female), and the traveler as the one being either.
ArcTan 05-31-07, 04:16 PM	Why must peolpe make the hideously erroneous assumption that chaos isn't inherently good? This is very moronic to me. I'd also like to pont out that I'm not intending to single ArcTan out in this. I see this kind of lawful(and therefore usually evil/tyranny) intollerance toward chaos all over the place. Why is this LE attitude always so prevailant? Or is that just an anti-USA(freedom) attitude? 'Tis very, very sad..... ...and limiting. Er, what? I said that the Goblinoid Pantheon explicitly *did* think a little chaos (small-c) was good. That's why they had the Traveller as one of their main deities instead of relegated to the Dark Six "bad" group. The Sovereign Host/Dark Six split is one that's slightly Lawful-aligned -- the SH has only one CG deity, 2 LG deities and one LN deity, while the DS has no Lawful deities and two Chaotic ones. Even so, the Traveller represents the *idea* of chaos (not necessarily D&D Chaos) much more than any other god, and the fact that the Sarlonan Humans felt the need to relegate him to the Dark Six and one of the hidden, secret pantheons says something about their biases (understandable, since they set themselves up as the civilized, law-abiding civilization in contrast to the Ghaal'dar). I don't see what any of these observations have to do with my own biases about Law/Chaos, or why that even matters, since D&D alignment is imaginary. FWIW, I fully acknowledge that D&D means the Law/Chaos axis to be different from the Good/Evil axis, as would anyone with half a brain who read the section on alignment. I also do believe that the D&D idea of "Law/Chaos" does correspond to a real-life concept (which Gygax was referencing when he put it in D&D, referencing Poul Anderson and Michael Moorcock) that I, too, think often has people too often erring on the side of Law rather than Chaos, of consistency and universal standards rather than the side of the freedom to err for freedom's sake and the fundamental sacred mysteries of human choice. That all said, I still think your post was kind of dumb and an obvious troll.
ArcTan 05-31-07, 04:22 PM	Frankly, I would hope that "the Overthrown" is something more original than just a "Sharn Inquisitive: Greyhawk god appears in Eberron - is Pelor next? Dol Arrah's priesthood refuses to comment!"-style watering down of the setting's uniqueness which importing Tharizdun would be. For that matter, what's to say that "the Overthrown" hasn't always been "the Overthrown" even when the goblinoid empire was at its height? Maybe that's the whole thrust of what it represents. It'd be weird to have a god whose point was to not be a god anymore. I mean, maybe "The Overthrown" really is what he was always called, but it'd have to represent something different when he was actually worshipped. Because right now "The Overthrown" is a name that represents the fact that no one worships him and only archeologists are even aware of him. By the way, the Dhakaani Empire at its height discouraged large-scale religion, was officially agnostic, and did not recogize the Pantheon of Sixteen, which developed in the centuries after the Dhakaani Empire fell, its cultural remnants faded into the caverns and it was replaced by the Tribal Coalition of the Ghaal'dar. Alternately, as was discussed in another thread a while back, the sixteenth god might have been a representation of some other Eberronian force (such as the Dreaming Dark); there're certainly plenty of menacing ones to go around. It could also have been (essentially) a god which represented Dhakaani nationalism. In either case, the Host types would've had good cause to want to wipe out all traces of it. Dhakaan was a dead and faded memory by the time the Humans came. The new Hobgoblin nationality was Ghaal'dar, and the Ghaal'dar tribes and the lost Dhakaani have little love lost for each other. Anyway, I'm currently rolling around in my head a way to adapt Tharizdun so he's 1) cooler than his original D&D representation, and 2) makes sense and is thematically appropriate in an Eberron context. If there actually was a "God of Entropy" -- i.e. a god who represented endings, and things falling apart, and the fundamental truth that the universe will someday end -- the Humans could've found that philosophically threatening in a very basic way even if he wasn't specifically a god of Goblinoid nationalism. I mean, *all* of the gods would've been gods of Goblinoid nationalism -- it was the Goblinoid Pantheon. My take on it is that the specifically Goblinoid war god simply got remade into the Mockery and a total bad guy. Humans wouldn't've been directly threatened by the idea of worshipping a god of Goblins Win Wars as they would've of worshipping a god of Everything Dies in the End. *That* they might've wanted to put a direct philosophical stop to, betraying certain blinders in their own way of viewing the world. (My own view is that the god Tharizdun represents a concept that is not necessarily Evil at all, even though it's a scary one -- and it would only become some kind of genocide death-cult if twisted by oppression and generations of misunderstanding.)
ArcTan 05-31-07, 04:23 PM	This is the first time i have posted, Here is a Heretical thought the nine represents the 9 male gods, the six represents the 6 female gods(assuming the unknown god is female), and the traveler as the one being either. It's heretical in that it's canonically false, and that there's not much point in making it true unless you want your campaign to center around some kind of (IMO) hackneyed idea of a gender war with the feminist deities being the oppressed underdogs, but whatever floats your boat.
ArcTan 05-31-07, 04:25 PM	Enough with the Law Vs. Chaos debates. Also I would like to point out that USA a example of a chaotic culture. The USA, like any culture, is a mixture of different and contradictory things all wanting to lay claim to being the heart of the culture from which they come. The USA, or parts of it, often lay a much stronger claim to certain Chaotic values (i.e. a kind of libertarianism, "freedom", etc.) than most other cultures it lives among. That doesn't really mean as much as you might think it would, though.
ArcTan 05-31-07, 04:26 PM	Because chaos cannot support large scale human life. Civilization by definition is lawful, it is the supression of the wild chaos of nature into a structured order by which "civilized" life can be conducted. You could not even FEED a nation without order, as agriculture is required, and chaos cannot produce enough food to feed millions of people, while ordered planting and harvesting can. Would *YOU* want to live in a world where you don't know where your next meal is coming from, where you will sleep tonight, or if your loved ones would come home? That is chaos. *shrug* Law means doing what you're supposed to just because you're supposed to, Chaos means doing what you want just because you want. Animals, who ultimately mainly just do what they have to do to survive, are given as our example of TN alignment. Most Humans ultimately default to being more or less TN because they, too, mostly do what they have to to survive. But everyone does a little bit of both -- doing things because it's the thing to do, doing things because you just felt like it. No one can ultimately be happy unless they do some of both. Why the big fuss?
Lurkalot 05-31-07, 07:25 PM	Because chaos cannot support large scale human life. Civilization by definition is lawful, it is the supression of the wild chaos of nature into a structured order by which "civilized" life can be conducted. You could not even FEED a nation without order, as agriculture is required, and chaos cannot produce enough food to feed millions of people, while ordered planting and harvesting can. Would *YOU* want to live in a world where you don't know where your next meal is coming from, where you will sleep tonight, or if your loved ones would come home? That is chaos. You're equating Law with Organisation and Chaos with Disorganisation. That isn't necessarily the case. A group without centralised authority would qualify as chaotic in D&D terms, but could be successfully self-organising. The open source software movement would probably be a real-world example - free agents working together for a common good, without compulsion. The key word in all of this is authority. This probably isn't the place for a wide ranging discussion of the terms of Chaos and Law, however. Am happy to carry on discussing it, but I don't want to polute someone else's thread. So back on topic, I thought the Sovereign Host and Dark Six were supposedly based either on real dragons or in dragon mythology. The descriptions in the ECS each give an representation of the gods as a particular colour of dragon and I seem to recall it suggesting that this is an older representation that isn't used much any more. If this is the case then it strongly suggests that the pantheon is either inherited from the dragons or based on specific legendary dragons who were influential in Khorvaire's early history of goblins or humans. Subtle supporting evidence for this might also be that the Dark Six are not evil in the Rakshasha Rajah / Demonic Outsider sense, but only in the "I'm really angry like a Red Dragon" sense. I think if it the Dark Six were not based on dragons, then the evil of them would be more in line with the Rajahs as True Evil (tm). But it clearly isn't presented that way in the books. It's much more natural.
ArcTan 05-31-07, 08:09 PM	This probably isn't the place for a wide ranging discussion of the terms of Chaos and Law, however. Am happy to carry on discussing it, but I don't want to polute someone else's thread. So back on topic, I thought the Sovereign Host and Dark Six were supposedly based either on real dragons or in dragon mythology. The descriptions in the ECS each give an representation of the gods as a particular colour of dragon and I seem to recall it suggesting that this is an older representation that isn't used much any more. If this is the case then it strongly suggests that the pantheon is either inherited from the dragons or based on specific legendary dragons who were influential in Khorvaire's early history of goblins or humans. The early representations of the Host among Humans are as Dragons, yes. The Dragons themselves don't worship the Host deities, though, but their own Draconic Pantheon, which is quite different (and the same as the core Draconic Pantheon). Some Humans believe, because of this, that the SH literally are Ascended Dragons and that the Dragons are a divine race. Others believe that this is just mythology and that the Host are above all true earthly forms but that the forms that symbolize them best are Human because their favored worshippers are Human. The two groups are often at odds, especially on how to respond to Draconic involvement in Human affairs. Subtle supporting evidence for this might also be that the Dark Six are not evil in the Rakshasha Rajah / Demonic Outsider sense, but only in the "I'm really angry like a Red Dragon" sense. I think if it the Dark Six were not based on dragons, then the evil of them would be more in line with the Rajahs as True Evil (tm). But it clearly isn't presented that way in the books. It's much more natural. Dragons or no Dragons, the idea of gods who are "bad" gods but not actually antagonists of the universe is hardly new. Just look at the Greek gods, and gods like Ares.
Lurkalot 06-01-07, 12:19 PM	Dragons or no Dragons, the idea of gods who are "bad" gods but not actually antagonists of the universe is hardly new. Just look at the Greek gods, and gods like Ares. New to us? No - you're absolutely right. But D&D seems to have come late to the realisation that angry vengeful gods are not necessarily lords of an abyss that want to destroy human life. Where is all the information about dragons not being the deities? I rather liked the slight implication in the ECS that dragons might have set themselves up as deities to the humans.
ArcTan 06-01-07, 03:22 PM	It's mostly in Keith Baker's Eberron novels, which aren't truly canon for the Eberron RPG setting but are nonetheless interesting insights from the man who created the whole thing.
Lurkalot 06-01-07, 07:37 PM	Ah. I haven't read those, so that's probably why I haven't come across it before. Was the information from the Omniscient Author point of view, or from a character's mouth? Just curious. Every single one of the Sovereign Host and Dark Six are given a unique dragon equivalent that they are still "occasionally portrayed as." Although the Dark Six ones get a bit twisted (Shadow Dragon, Khyber Wyrm). There has to be a reason for that.
slimenstrakhazmodan 06-14-07, 12:35 AM	Another couple thoughts of the "Lost God" since there are those that worship the dragon representation of the gods perhaps Tiamat may fall in there a godly hydra with 15 heads that was broken in some way. I know time line playing can be an issue perhaps that lost family member in some ones character background is the lost god or the pc them self if you plan on a longterm campaign. In one campaign we went back and were ultimately responsible for the genocide of most other races being lead by a hero of our past who was actually a racist psycho but history is after all written byt he winners.
ArcTan 06-15-07, 06:45 AM	Ah. I haven't read those, so that's probably why I haven't come across it before. Was the information from the Omniscient Author point of view, or from a character's mouth? It was common knowledge that there was a fight going on between followers of the gods-as-dragons and their more orthodox brethren who rejected them as heretics.
ArcTan 06-15-07, 06:47 AM	Another couple thoughts of the "Lost God" since there are those that worship the dragon representation of the gods perhaps Tiamat may fall in there a godly hydra with 15 heads that was broken in some way. No. If you're going to make Tiamat real, make her the big scary form she has in the actual core books as the dragon with a lot of heads. Otherwise make her a distant ideal, like the core Eberron deities. Do not make her into just some giant hydra with special powers and have her godhood be some kind of stupid misunderstanding. I hate that crap, and anything else that seems designed to cheapen or demean an existing concept.