I'm trying to find more details but forum searches and Google searches turn up little. Does anyone have any pointers to where I can find more details about Adama?
Thanks!
The philosophy of the Shining Lands of Durpar, Var the Golden, and Estagund sees all things in the world as connected and part of a single creation spirit, the Adama or the One; all the many powers of the Realms are different aspects of the One, and consequently the Shining Lands are some of the most religiously tolerant in the Realms, with literally all deities being reverenced here (although the Faerûnian pantheon holds the Shining Lands within its sphere of influence—see below).
These are all pre-Realms-2008 books, where most Realmslore is to be found.
The Adama is big of goodness, tolerance, respect, honesty, and trade. There's also a reincarnation aspect.
Although all gods are technically a part of the Adama, the Durpari have five favourites form other pantheons who most exemplify it: Torm, Waukeen, Oghma (known as Curna, female), Selune (called Lucha), and Gond (called Zionil). (These last three have slightly different philosophies under their aliases; we theorise them to be different deites from the area, equated with the others.)
Didn't know those gods were connected to the Adama tenants by the Durpari...
The Padhran Faith itself is a sub-sect of the Path of Enlightenment, which is in reality a code of conduct on how to properly live one's life, in accordance to the 'will of Heaven'.
The actual gods may change from sect to sect (or merely change names), but the basic tenets are the same. The gods become secondary to the 'Mandate of Heaven', which boils down to obedience, loyalty, hard work (perseverance & excellence), and piety (to spirits as well as gods). In fact, all of those can go under the umbrella heading of RESPECT.
Meanwhile, Ed has stated many times (and all over the old grey box) that Faerûn IS Pantheonic in nature, and only priests dedicate themselves to a single deity (and even then, there are exceptions).
Since that is how the Realms are supposed to be, despite newer sources to the contrary, I would say the Adama is a fine fit for the Realms - most especially in a region that 'rubs shoulders' with multiple Faiths from all directions.
If the Durpari had to pick any gods of other nations that most represented the concept of the Adama, it would be Torm, Waukeen, Lucha/Selune, Curna/Oghma and Zionil/Gond. These foreign deities have the strongest following in the Shining Lands, but mainly as introduced by foreigners. (I theorised that Lucha, Curna and Zionil come from the Utter East area.)
Durpar is probably the most tolerant of religion of any country in the Realms. Even evil gods can be worshipped, although those that demand human sacrifice are suppressed. The only religion actively opposed is that of worship of Mask, the patron of thieves.
The philosophy of the Adama, or "the One", is a vital part of Durparian life. The Adama is the world spirit that embraces and enfolds the divine essence that is part of all beings; gods, men, animals, plants, rocks, and all of their existence. Therefore everything is a manifestation of the Adama. Adama has no temples or priests in the common sense, for he is worshipped through
his manifestations.
The philosophy of the Adama teaches that a man must be born many times before he can truly embrace unity with the Adama. Each reincarnation will reflect the man's previous life. Therefore, he must strive to better and improve himself during his lifetime. This is one of the reasons why killing and theft are considered such serious crimes. Such actions can condemn a person to be reincarnated as an animal in the next life.
Since all deities are considered aspects of the Adama, there are many with large followings in the Shining Lands. The largest are the sects of Lucha, she who guides; Curna, goddess of wisdom; Zionil, patron of inventors, craftsmen and creators; and Torm, the god of duty. Waukeen, god of trade, used to have a significant following. With the uncertainty of the god's fate in the Time of Troubles, most worshippers and even some priests have been accepted in Lucha's temples.
I've mentioned in other 'project threads' that I believe the Adama faith is very similar to the Padhran Faith of the east, and that this may actually be a 'western branch' of that faith (a sect, if you will).
The Padhran Faith itself is a sub-sect of the Path of Enlightenment, which is in reality a code of conduct on how to properly live one's life, in accordance to the 'will of Heaven'.
The actual gods may change from sect to sect (or merely change names), but the basic tenets are the same. The gods become secondary to the 'Mandate of Heaven', which boils down to obedience, loyalty, hard work (perseverance & excellence), and piety (to spirits as well as gods). In fact, all of those can go under the umbrella heading of RESPECT.
No no no no no no. Similarity does not mean same. Most lawfully-oriented faiths would espouse similar concepts, that does not mean that they are inherently the same. They may share some elements and intents, but also have different backgrounds and goals.
The Padhran faith, as a copy of Buddhism, has no relation to the Path Of Enlightenment, a copy of Confucianism, neither in the Realmslore or the real world. Ditto the Way, Taoism. The Adama and the Padhra may be related, but only in that they share some philosophies and backgrounds in Hinduism.
We've been over this a thousand times. :p We agreed in KT Redux that you'd least stop trying to mash together the Indianesque and Oriental faiths. There's simply no connection between them, nor need for it.
That should obviously have been followed by a "in the Realms." note, though I didn't bother because I didn't think it would be necessary. So :P again. ;)
I treat the Adama like I would a heresy. In 3E Terms, if you wanted to be a cleric of the Adama, you'd need the heretical feat (from Power of Faerûn), and you could select virtually any domain you can think of. Your domain selection would closely relate to what aspect of the Adama you most closely relate to, and would also influence which deity is granting you divine abilities.
If you went North and started preaching about the Adama, you'd be treated like a heretic. At best you'd run into a kind individual who is going to try and "set you right" and at worst you'd run into an angry group of people trying to chase you out of town. (Most likely whipped up by local clergy who hate you for your heresy.)
Of course, you would also likely gain some supporters as well, and your divine abilities could not be denied. (But you would face a smear campaign, with local clergy of various deities proclaiming that you gain your powers from devils, demons, or other nefarious sources.)
All in all, it would be pretty ugly as most heresies go, because you'd earn ire from many different religious cults not just one.
The Adaman would be just a funny foreigner getting it all wrong.
Then again, there'd troubles when it comes down to specific examples: "Selune and Shar are the same!" That wouldn't go down well.
:P
That should obviously have been followed by a "in the Realms." note, though I didn't bother because I didn't think it would be necessary. So :P again. ;)
Given that we essentially have Hindus in the Realms (Indra, Yama, Garuda in Kara-Tur), it's a fair statement. :P
Sure, it might be something like that in a situation with someone worshiping Curna meeting someone who worshiped Oghma.
However, the Adama is a completely different ball of wax. You're literally saying: Torm and Bane are the same, Chauntea and Talos are the same, Lathander and Malar are the same, all of the deities are the same. Go around saying that, and you'd suddenly find something each one of those faiths agree on: the Adamaite must go. :P
I wouldn't be shocked to see both Tormites and Banites working together to silence such a person. More fanatical followers might even attempt to silence the Adamaite permanently. Don't be surprised if the followers of Talona don't try and poison you, and the followers of Loviatar don't try and kidnap you and torture you until you renounce your heresy.
It just isn't going to go over well at all, mostly because you're stepping into politics between the various churches and deities. (Just as you pointed out saying Selune and Shar are the same isn't going to go over well with either.)
My comments are really referring to smaller towns and villages out in the more rural countryside. They are much more likely to stick out like a sore thumb.
If a Adamite wanted to spread the faith beyond Durpar, to some place like Cormyr for example, their best bet is to find a small village that has no shrines or temples, but has the potential to grow larger. Once there, set up shop, heal the sick and injured, do all that is required in order to gain converts. Make sure the news of your 'good deeds' spreads to the surrounding region so people flock to you for help.
The benefit the Adamaite has over his opponents is this: the Tormite (and other faiths) can claim the Adamaite a heretic, but he cannot explain away his clerical powers. The Adamaite can claim the Tormite true, but mistaken: he worships only an aspect of the Adama whereas the Adamaite worships the whole. In that way he does not have to explain away the Tormite Cleric's powers. When it comes to individual deities and their feuds, the Adamaite can claim that the Adama has many faces, but each face is created in the minds of mortals and is only an aspect of a larger whole.
The Adamaites argument is much more difficult to disprove from the point of view of commoners.
The Adama, to my understanding, is not this or that - it's literally everything. All gods known anywhere on Toril are manifestations of the Adama, the grass, the people, the trees, everything is a manifestation of the Adama. It is the belief system that gave birth to the code of behavior.
As BadCatMan put it: "The Adama is not pantheonic. It's an overarching world-spirit and philosophy, like a single-god faith. All other gods are thought to be a part of the Adama, but the believers think of it as the Adama, not Torm or Waukeen or anyone."
This means that if a member of this religious group is walking down the street and bumps into a Tormite and a Banite Priest arguing he's going to tell them that Torm and Bane are the same. That the gods that they know are merely aspects of a larger being, a being that they themselves are also apart of.
The -real- question that should be asked is this: Do those who follow the Adama also worship individual aspects of it? (For example, take a patron deity.) Or do they simply embrace the Adama as a whole, believing that embracing only one is akin to calling your little finger a hand, and a hand a person.
Oooo-kay, but then we are told that there are several "deities" that are more prominent among worshippers of the Adama - Torm, Waukeen, Selune etc . If the Adam holds that all deities are part of the same and just manifestations of the Adama, just what are they then and how are they different - are they something like saints, uber-powerful beings akin to dragons, etc? If they are all parts pf the same you would not need separate names.
-Think of it as one "unifying force" that exhibits (and people worship) specific facets. It's Angherradh, but on a much larger scale: Three in one, and one in three.
The -real- question that should be asked is this: Do those who follow the Adama also worship individual aspects of it? (For example, take a patron deity.) Or do they simply embrace the Adama as a whole, believing that embracing only one is akin to calling your little finger a hand, and a hand a person.
The answer here is both aswell. :D
They will BELIEVE in the whole 'all is one' aspect, but in practise WORSHIP one or multiple aspects (or 'faces') of the Adama, thereby empowering the portfolios of Gond, Torm, Waukeen, Selune and Oghma the most.
Makes it manageble in game terms (aspecially concerning a PC's afterlife) and for the dieties aswell.
Given that we essentially have Hindus in the Realms (Indra, Yama, Garuda in Kara-Tur), it's a fair statement. :P
Given that I ignore the existence of Kara-Tur for the most part... no. :P ;)
It seems to be roughly equivalent to the Hindu concept of the Brahman, but also very different.
Yes, Hinduism is the most obvious comparison. I'd be surprised if there weren't comparable religious ideas and practices -- albeit solely esoteric, without the Adama's exoteric role in society -- in central and northern Faerûn.
If they are all parts pf the same you would not need separate names.
The various monist philosophies of Earth don't reject all vocabulary for subdivisions of the cosmos!
Given that I ignore the existence of Kara-Tur for the most part... no. :P ;)
-You're missing out, then.
Catholocism certainly embraces a tripartite aspect while still maintaining that its a monotheistic faith...
True--Christianity in general does that.
Oooo-kay, but then we are told that there are several "deities" that are more prominent among worshippers of the Adama - Torm, Waukeen, Selune etc . If the Adam holds that all deities are part of the same and just manifestations of the Adama, just what are they then and how are they different - are they something like saints, uber-powerful beings akin to dragons, etc? If they are all parts pf the same you would not need separate names.
By that logic, they wouldn't need separate words for grass, trees, humans, elves, either, because those things are just as much part of the Adama. In practice, while philosophically they might believe that a gnome and a brick are both part of the Adama, they need separate words for gnome and brick so that their construction materials don't shout angrily at them while they apply the mortar. Similarly, while they believe that one another are part of the Adama, they need separate names for one another so that the right person responds when they shout to warn them about falling bricks.
It's the same with gods. They worship the gods separately, just as Hindus worship Shiva, Vishnu, and Ganesha separately while maintaining that they're all aspects of the Brahman.
So that's what they are. They're gods, who are all one in theory but in practice are pretty different. I wouldn't say they're as closely connected as the persons of the Christian Trinity; the gods in the Adama faith have their own personalities, stories, and motivations, just as mortal believers in the Adama have their own names and personalities despite being part of the Adama themselves. Angharradh is a better comparison, though aspects of the Adama are more likely to hate each other, punish each other, kill each other, mate with each other, or give birth to one another than the aspects of Angharradh are.
I don't honestly think this philosophy would be quite so outrageous from the perspective of other Faerunian faiths as Meldread makes them out to be. Sure, they think Torm and Bane are part of the same person - but they know perfectly well that at the same time, these two aspects of the Adama disagree on practically everything, and are of antithetical natures. They aren't stupid. They merely represent opposing aspects of the Adama.
I don't think a feat would be necessary for them to get spells, either. Most gods are happy enough to have worshipers that they're not going to boycott a cult based on something so abstract and irrelevant (from their point of view) as pantheism.
In addition: it's extremely possible that the Adamaites are correct, and the gods might be perfectly aware of it, though perhaps reluctant or incapable of sharing this knowledge with their worshipers. Alternatively, they may be unaware of it. Functionally, it would make little difference. If you believe that Elminster and Regis the Halfling are aspects of the same world-spirit, but manage not to know it, then Torm and Bane could be aspects of the same oversoul without knowing it themselves, or without it changing any aspect of the Forgotten Realms canon as we know it.
It's not necessarily a heresy or something that can be proven or disproven even by the gods. It is simply a different perspective, one that postulates that every soul is part of a single oversoul. When a mortal achieves divinity, they may expand to take up a greater portion of the oversoul (if this has any meaning), but they aren't any more or less a part of the Adama than they were when they were mortal. When the avatars were cast from the heavens by Ao, they were cut off from their divine powers, but they were not cut off from the Adama. Ao is part of the Adama too, and in casting the avatars out he was correcting a disturbance created by the divine personalities, but the Adama itself remained unchanged. The faces of the Adama are only masks - some of these masks are temperamental and whimsical, some are calm and serene, and some of them are made of baked mud and you can build things with them, but the Adama behind the masks is eternal and unchanging.
Where the study of real world religious history parts dramatically from trying to apply the knowledge to the Realms is on issues of faith. Taken literally, faith is a belief that is not based on proof, but in the Realms there is no "faith" as we'd understand it. The gods are real. It is an indisputable fact. They've walked the land. Powerful Clerics can commune with them. They have interactions with the world.
So you have two things that are really divergent and yet present at the same time in the Realms. We have things that we'd consider heresies, which is nothing more than going against the more established beliefs and practices, but by no means is exactly untrue. Yet, how do you square something like Adama and the more orthodox faiths to the north? One is clearly right and the other clearly wrong, yet at the same time it is unclear why the gods would allow certain heresies to flourish.
In the real world you could have groups like the Gnostics, Catharism, and many other competing schools, types and flavors of Christianity, but in the Realms... how do you justify such things? We know that they exist, and exist in large numbers, what is not clear is how or why.
There is also a question of orthodoxy vs orthopraxy when it comes to religion in the Realms. This is a debate that I do not believe anyone has had previously, and one that could be interesting.
That is based on the assumption that all those who worship the Adama do so by worshiping individual "faces" of it. As I said previously, that could work, and no doubt happens, but at the same time you're certainly going to get individuals who want to worship the whole instead of a part.
The best illustrative example I can think of is to say that one person only worships a finger and claims to worship the hand, while you have another that worships a finger as part of the hand, and yet another who worships the entire hand by acknowledging that the fingers are extensions of it.
All three approaches can be taken, but each one is different from the others. Each one invokes different degrees of heresy from the more traditional faiths. The first (who only worships a finger and claims to worship the hand) is more or less in line with those further to the north. The second (who worships a finger as part of the hand) is the first real slide into heresy: one may worship Shar and the other Selune, but understand both are part of a larger whole, and therefore as a result of that belief not see themselves as bitter enemies. Such a viewpoint would strongly go against the grain of the traditional faith. The third (who worships the entire hand by acknowledging that the fingers are extensions of it) is the most pantheistic in the truest sense. They'd worship Bane, Torm, Ilmater, Shar, and Selune all equally and without bias or favoritism toward one or another. The third type is the real problem and where the real heresy sets in for all the reasons I outlined previously. Under previous edition rules such an individual is likely to be labeled faithless because they did not choose a patron deity. Additionally, getting clerical abilities becomes much more difficult.
You could always say that the third type does not exist because the gods would not allow it – it is too heretical. However, in doing that does it not undermine the entire belief system that they tried to establish?
Where the study of real world religious history parts dramatically from trying to apply the knowledge to the Realms is on issues of faith. Taken literally, faith is a belief that is not based on proof, but in the Realms there is no "faith" as we'd understand it. The gods are real. It is an indisputable fact. They've walked the land. Powerful Clerics can commune with them. They have interactions with the world.
What percentage of the population of Toril is a powerful cleric? What percentage witnessed an avatar in the flesh? For everyone else, faith exists. Even for those who are members of those select demographic groups, there is room for doubt about many things. If Tymora is as powerful as we're taught, how was she exiled from the Outer Planes? Perhaps if she wasn't worthy to remain ensconced in the heavens, she's not worthy of our worship. How much of my luck is really granted by her, and how much is just chance? Was the avatar really Tymora, or was she a fraud? Who really answers my prayers? Am I communing with a goddess, some subordinate proxy, or my own magically-enhanced inner self? As a trickster goddess, isn't she more than capable of lying to me if she sees fit? Assuming she is as powerful as we're taught, does that make her worthy of worship?
All of these questions require some level of faith on the part of the faithful. The difference between faith in the Realms and faith in the real world is only one of degree.
Yet, how do you square something like Adama and the more orthodox faiths to the north? One is clearly right and the other clearly wrong
Well, I think your absolutism on this subject is clearly wrong, but the nature of the divine in the Forgotten Realms setting is not nearly as clear-cut as you seem to think. The question isn't, "is everything part of a single cosmic oversoul or not?" but "to what degree is everything part of a single cosmic oversoul?" A huge range is possible, from everything as an indistinguishable hivemind with no individual forms or personalities to everything completely separate, with every monad unable to communicate with any other.
Most people in Faerun would, if asked, say that each soul is a completely separate, but if pressed the more informed might admit that the existence of psionic powers indicates that some level of oneness might exist in certain circumstances. The more open-minded might agree that it's at least hypothetically possible that some low-level connectiveness might, for the sake of argument, exist at all times, but surely not to the degree the Adamaites suggest.
The believers in the Adama would say that everything is indeed one in a deep sense, but they would not suggest that this means that things cannot have separate personalities, memories, and experiences. Indeed, this is perhaps the reason why individual souls and gods exist, so that the Adama can experience itself from many different points of view. Perhaps, an Adamaite might suggest, some entities are more separate from the Adama than others. Perhaps those who depart most strongly from their philosophy are more separated from the oversoul. This is not necessarily a bad thing; in fact, such beings might be valued by the Adama for the strongly divergent perspective they offer.
As for the question of heresies in general, the gods exist on a level very different from the mortal one. Their experiences cannot be precisely communicated to mortals, who cannot hope to understand the experiences and thoughts of a god.
Imagine, for the sake of comparison, that a god is a four-dimensional being attempting to explain an additional dimension of experience with a three-dimensional being. They can use analogies, comparing themselves to a three-dimensional being attempting to explain depth to a two-dimensional being, but you can't fully know what it's like unless you've gotten another dimension yourself.
Now, I don't mean that literally, but gods are similarly beyond mortals. They exist in hazy, allusive dimensions of myth and legend, faith and prayer, that mortals do not. Gods are simultaneously independent beings and beings who exist in the secret hearts and spirits of those who believe in them or act according to their precepts. They are simultaneously objective beings with a real presence in the cosmos and subjective beings who can be different things to everyone who perceives, prays to, or thinks about them. They can have multiple origins at once; every myth about them can be true simultaneously. They are potent demiurges, creators of the world and its races, and they are themselves created by the beliefs, hopes, dreams, and fears of mortals. From their perspective, this is not a paradox; it is simply the way they exist. They see the world through hundreds or thousands of eyes at once, exist with multiple forms of awareness and memory, and with their expanded consciousness this is perfectly normal. They can shape the planes with a thought, but they themselves are shaped by the stories, actions, and - yes - faith of those who live on the planes (which includes the Material Plane).
So yes, absolutely those who believe in the Adama and those who do not believe in the Adama can both be correct.
As I said previously, that could work, and no doubt happens, but at the same time you're certainly going to get individuals who want to worship the whole instead of a part.
Nobody has to choose between worshiping the Adama in whole or in part. They can do both. They can worship the world-spirit or the oversoul in some ceremonies, and honor individual faces as the occasion merits. An amorphous, abstract pantheistic life-force isn't as useful in day-to-day tasks as an individual god is - for example, if you want someone to bless your attempt at making a horseshoe, you would pray to Gond, and if you want luck, you pray to Tymora. You pray to the Adama when you want to honor life or existence as a whole, and the times you want to do that are going to be less common than when you want something concrete.
This isn't really that different from the way people do things elsewhere in Faerun. They worship gods or groups of gods depending on their needs. If they want to revere all the gods at once, they can do that too by praying to all the gods at once: "Hear me, oh gods, creators, sustainers, and destroyers of all that is!" This isn't functionally that different from praying to the Adama as a whole.
one may worship Shar and the other Selune, but understand both are part of a larger whole, and therefore as a result of that belief not see themselves as bitter enemies.
Believers in the Adama do indeed have the benefit of not being as inclined to kill one another because of their religious inclinations, but that isn't really as different from northern religious practices as you're implying. Anyone in Faerun may at times feel the need to propitiate the goddess of darkness - darkness is, after all, a universal experience and a potentially hazardous one - as well as the goddess of the moon, and worshiping both at once isn't so outrageous. I'm sure many, many people have done so on moonlit nights, if only to pray that the war of the sisters does not personally inconvenience them.
Durpari are perfectly aware that Shar and Selune are bitter enemies of one another, just as cats and mice are bitter enemies (of a sort) but still both have their place within the Adama. Would an active Shar or Selune cast their Durparian clerics from the faith, refusing to grant them spells for refusing to assassinate fellow believers in the Adama? I would argue not: they serve their goddesses in other ways, and in proselytizing for their goddess as a being fit to be worshiped they increase the power that goddess wields on Toril, even if they don't do so violently. They're still useful, in other words.
Under previous edition rules such an individual is likely to be labeled faithless because they did not choose a patron deity. Additionally, getting clerical abilities becomes much more difficult.
Do you think the Faithless and False system really implies that someone who worships both Torm and Tymora with all their heart, attending regular services, praying regularly, and seeking to advance the cause of both deities in the world, is damned as Faithless because they didn't choose one over the other? That seems like a pretty senseless interpretation to me - clearly, such a character is not faithless; they merely have faith in more than one deity, to the benefit of both. Worshipers of the Adama are like that. If they spend their lives honoring the gods, praying to them, giving them offerings, reading from their holy books in the streets, they are being neither Faithless nor False.
If you're arguing that there are some Adamaites who refuse to pray to or honor any god, revering only the pure energy of the oversoul and never entering a church or giving an offering, they would indeed be Faithless, and would rightfully be sealed up in a wall in the afterlife (which is itself part of the Adama, and where they are equally capable of revering their unpersonified cosmic spirit - the Wall of the Faithless is as worthy of reverence as any other sacred thing, though not to the exclusion of every other aspect of the Adama). There's no reason we should assume that the religion of the Adama puts up with not revering the gods: the gods exist for a reason, every one of them, and it is right for mortals to be pious.
Arguably, it's impossible to truly worship every god equally. There is always going to be some difference in personal inclination, no matter how slight, that makes one more suited to one afterlife than another.
This actually isn't a problem in the case of the Adama, though, if you assume that faithful believers in the Adama are reincarnated.
As for spells, you could require a feat for those who worshiped the Adama rather than an individual patron, or you could make them an exception to the general rule that you need a god to gain divine spells (or you could say that the Adama, representing as it does all divinities as a whole or even the secret source of all divinity, as well as being President of the United States, counts as a god for this purpose to Ao's satisfaction). You could argue, however, that no cleric of the Adama lacks an individual patron, and this could easily be explained within the context of their theology - clerics are needed to properly honor and advance the Adama's aspects, but the Adama as a whole needs no clerics, being complete in itself and incapable of advancement. You don't really see temples or priests of the Brahman in Hinduism, and this is no different.
But that is only one third of the argument and problem. The other two thirds deals with the mortal individuals of Toril.
A lot of the competing theologies hinge on whether or not the faiths of Faerûn focus more on Orthodoxy or Orthopraxy.
----
Orthodox comes from the Greek word orthodoxos "having the right opinion," from orthos ("right, true, straight") and doxa ("opinion, praise", related to dokein, "thinking"). It is typically used to mean adhering to the accepted or traditional and established faith in a religion.
Orthodoxy is opposed to heterodoxy ("other teaching"), heresy and schism. People who deviate from orthodoxy by professing a doctrine considered to be false are most often called heretics or radicals, while those who deviate from orthodoxy by removing themselves from the perceived body of beliefs are called schismatics.
Apostasy is a violation of orthodoxy that takes the form of abandonment of the faith. A lighter deviation from orthodoxy than heresy is commonly called error, in the sense of not being grave enough to cause total estrangement.
Although orthodoxy is most prevalent and even inherently pervasive in nearly all forms of organized monotheism, such believes are not usually overly emphasized in polytheistic or animist religions. Often there is little to no concept of dogma, and varied interpretation of doctrine and theology is tolerated and sometimes even encouraged within certain contexts. Syncretism, for example, plays a much wider role in non-monotheistic (and particularly, non-scriptural) religion.
----
Orthopraxy is also derived from Greek meaning "correct action / activity," and places the emphasis on religious conduct, both ethical and liturgical, as opposed to holding the correct belief and correct rituals.
While orthodoxies make use of codified beliefs, most often in the form of canonized scripture, and ritualism more narrowly centers on the strict adherence to prescribed rites or rituals, orthopraxic religions are most often focused on issues of family, cultural integrity, the transmission of tradition, sacrificial offerings, concerns of purity, ethical systems, and the enforcement thereof.
----
Now, here is my argument: Faerûnian religion focuses more on Orthodoxy than Orthopraxy unlike traditional pantheistic systems. This is evident in that there exists a specific dogma for each deity. Even if the deity does not outright sanction the dogma and it is created by the dominant cult, the existence of the dogma therefore establishes Orthodoxy.
The Adamaites you describe would be individuals who engage in heterodoxy (opinions or doctrines that depart from the accepted beliefs or standards). As similarly viewed by Roman Catholicism someone who engages in heterodoxy refers to the views that differ from strictly orthodox views, but retain sufficient faithfulness to the original doctrine to avoid heresy.
My position is not that you are incorrect in saying that some Adamaites, perhaps even the majority of them, are as you describe. My larger point is that there are individuals who can take the concept of the Adama to its logical conclusions and thereby move from heterodoxy to heresy, which would be individuals who I described in previous posts.
In previous edition 3E lore here is what we knew the afterlife: A worshiper's soul automatically recognized an agent of its own deity, knows that it needs to go with that agent, and cannot be deceived by any means into following the agent of another divine power. We know that there were two groups that did not fit in the previous grouping, the Faithless and the False. The Faithless are individuals who firmly denied any faith or only gave lip service to the gods most of their lives without truly believing. The False intentionally betrayed a faith they believed in and to which they had made a personal commitment. There are separate punishments for both groups.
If an individual worships the Adama as a whole, and -not- an individual "face" of the Adama (that is in game terms does not have a patron deity) then they cannot be part of the first group. They therefore most likely fit in the Faithless group.
Alternatively, although not stated in cannon, there may be a separate rule for them allowing them to technically be False instead of Faithless. Instead of punishment according to their crimes in the City of Judgment, they'd be reincarnated and sent back to Toril.
This of course is predicated on the belief that the Adama really is a heterodoxic or heretical belief and not "true." If it is true then it raises issues and questions about what we REALLY know about the deities, and brings into question all of the lore we've been told about them. Or at the very least "breaks" the Afterlife as established in lore in previous editions.
On the converse side of things, I should point out that the Adama definitely seems to embrace Orthopraxy over Orthodoxy.
Without Orthodoxy it opens the gate to many different heretical beliefs that would not even normally appear further to the North. Most of them would be syncretic in nature. (Syncretism consists of the attempt to reconcile disparate or contrary beliefs, often while melding practices of various schools of thought. The term may refer to attempts to merge and analogize several originally discrete traditions, especially in the theology and mythology of religion, and thus assert an underlying unity allowing for an inclusive approach to other faiths.)
This goes to the heart of the example you wrote about, with the individual who worships both Torm and Tymora with all their heart, in effect taking them both as a patron deity instead of just one. Such an individual is likely to engage in syncretism, perhaps to the Tormites and Tymorians to the north (who are more Orthodox) even going as so far as to engage in heresy. Additionally, what happens to the soul of this individual when they die? Who gets it? Tymora or Torm, or something else entirely?
Tyr's faith never seemed particularly centralized, and was in practice quite dynamic, more responsive to local laws and mores than they seemed to be to some central church orthodoxy. Oghma's church had a semblance of heirarchy, though that seemed relatively loose in structure at best. Really, what it comes down to, is who defines the orthodoxy in a church that has no central structure beyond the deity? Unless the deity hands down a set of scriptures and says this is my holy writ, which I can't recall a single one being mentioned as having done so, then the definition of orthodoxy within a given church will probably be fairly meaningless except at a regional level, and depend more on where you learned about the faith more than anything else. Obviously, the same would likely hold true for orthopraxy, outside of the major observations and rituals of the faith.
Lliira's church would likely be a prime example of a faith that lacked orthodoxy and orthopraxy beyond the broadest of senses.
To take the Cleric of Tymora for example, they're likely to be tolerant of many different things, but it is very easy to distort her dogma. For example, the dogma demands that her clergy be bold. Well, you could just as easy twist that around and say: be cautious. Avoiding bad luck is done through careful planning. She demands through her dogma that her clergy set goals and such, but you could turn that around and say: don't set goals! Trust in Lady Luck and live your life recklessly! (Even though the dogma expressly states that you not do such.)
Sure, those are minor things. They might even be accepted as heterodoxy by most members of the faith. Yet, it is very easy to begin to walk down that slippery slope, and because the gods are so well defined via their dogma it is therefore possible to eventually slip into heresy.
The only way you can be heretical in the typical sense is to violate some type of Orthodoxy. And we know that heresies exist in the Realms.
Honestly, I think the word (heresy) was used for lack of a better one, with little consideration given to the implications behind it, truly... really, Bane's is the only church I can think of that even refers to an orthodoxy, which makes sense for a lawful church, but even that was based more around who you followed as a leader rather than some core disagreement over church doctrine or theology. Not quite a heretic in the classic sense of the word... personally, my own feeling is that the 2e era was specifically going out of its way to avoid any real comparative analogies to real-world religion, with the apparent exception of the Triad as being semi-acceptable. That created a very unique feel to the religions and churches of the Realms, and implied a great deal about the formation of society within the Realms, and their general outlook on things. 3e, for the most part, maintained that sense, but started introducing some elements that didn't quite fit with what came previously... with 4e, it seems like someone wants to tell a story like something out of an Umberto Eco novel, so they had to hose all of the gods, churches, and fundamental social considerations to do so.
Which is fine and good in theory, but it doesn't really synch well with what came before. Bottom line for me, is that most churches don't seem anywhere near as concerned with ideas of orthodoxy or orthopraxy as they are on Earth, and the society around them reflects that, at least prior to the Spellplague. Post-Spellplague, I won't speak to, as the format the deities were left in left the field wide open to any interpretation desired. Good for a DM, bad for a debate.
We've been over this a thousand times. :p We agreed in KT Redux that you'd least stop trying to mash together the Indianesque and Oriental faiths. There's simply no connection between them, nor need for it.
This is a game. In the RW people may fight wars because they can't agree on what color nailpolish Jesus wore on a certain day, but in a game, such things matter not at all (unless it contributes to the over-all storyline).
We could easilly expound on 37 different religions that are all extremely similar, and go on for pages and pages talking about their insignificant differences, which have absolutely no bearing on the game what-so-ever (and I doubt most people will bother to read all that), or we can develop one set of 'universal laws' for eastern religion, and then point-out a few of the differences between major sects (which does effect the game, and people will be more willing to read THAT, then a 300-page treatise on Oriental religion).
There is a point when there is 'too much lore', and thats what 'caused' 4e FR in the first place.
With an 'Umbrella approach' to the Eastern religuions, we allow DMs to take the basic tenets and build upon them with their own ideas for various sects - we don't want to be forcing outr own concepts down everyone's throats. One of my main goals when the K-T thread turned into a project was to simplify K-T, not make it even harder to understand then it was before.
I've been thinking about all the various 're-dux projects' here, and I hate to say it, but I think most of them are becoming TOO detailed.
What we need to do is provide a usable overview of a region that DMs can work with, and then let them do the rest. We really don't need to work-out every single detail for them.
Not that this was the thread for that little 'rant', but since it is about several other threads, I figured here and now was as good a place as any.
Edit: And besides, everyone knows that in 4e, the Celestial Emperor killed Ao and took his stuff. :P
I come to the forums for the lore debates. It is what I enjoy the most: taking a small little detail and extrapolating on it.
Whether or not someone enjoys it as much as me is completely irrelevant to my own enjoyment - I'm selfish like that. :P
We could easilly expound on 37 different religions that are all extremely similar, and go on for pages and pages talking about their insignificant differences, which have absolutely no bearing on the game what-so-ever (and I doubt most people wil bother to read all that), or we can develop one set of 'universal laws' for eastern religion, and then point -out a few of the differences between major sects (which does effect the game, and people will be more willing to read THAT, then a 300-pafge treatise on Oriental religion).
There is apoint when thre is 'too much lore', and thats what caused 4e FR in the first place.
With an 'Umbrella approach' to the Eastern religuions, we allow DMs to take the basic tenets and build upon them with their own ideas for various sects - we don't want to be forcing outr own concepts down everyone's throats. One of my main goals when the K-T thread turned into a project was to simplify K-T, not make it even harder to understand then it was before.
I've been thinking about all the various 're-dux projects' here, and I hate to say it, but I think most of them are becoming TOO detailed.
What we need to do is provide a usable overview of a region that DMs can work with, and then let them do the rest. We really don't need to work-out every single detail for them.
I'd say that your approach would actually require much more detail and explanation, just to explain all the esoteric links and theories. Just look at this thread for the complexities of the Adama meets the Faerunian Pantheon for an example.
It would be much much easier and shorter to just say "here's the religion, this is what they do." and ignore trying to patch it all together. We really need no more than that. Do we really need to know how the Mulhorandi pantheon is related to the Faerunian, or the Elven to the Dwarven? No. Any game that includes followers of the Adama, will almost certainly not revolve around some obscure point of theology about links to the Celestial Emperor.
Plus, given how so damned close these faiths are to their real-world counterparts, still active in the modern world, I find it disrespectful and almost offensive to just call one a mere sub-sect of another, based on some small dodgy, wrong or imagined lore. (Perhaps only an atheist can see all religions as equal and accord them an equal amount of respect.)
I am far more religous then I let-on (you'd be surprised), and I respect and even believe in the tenets of most other major religions.
They really aren't as different as people think. In fact, it is mortal interpretation that causes most of the strife. There are certain 'Universal Truths' that can be distilled out of all religions, and THAT is what everyone needs to follow and believe in.
Else... we all become animals...
This is getting way too RW for me, but I just want to make it clear that I RESPECT all religions, and I am far, FAR from being an atheist.
In fact, if I lived in FR, I'd probably follow the Adama. ;)
Else... we all become animals...
We are animals--primates.*
This is getting way too RW for me, but I just want to make it clear that I RESPECT all religions, and I am far, FAR from being an atheist.
You say that like there's something wrong with it.
Being an atheist?
And my idea of a Prime-mate is a gorgeous, rich, deaf-mute who owns a bar. :P
As to being an atheist... I probably would be, except that I choose to believe in the otherworldly because it makes the world more interesting. But my belief doesn't make it real, it just makes the mundane world more tolerable.
We are animals--primates.*
[Feigned Indignation and Horror]
-Are you trying to say I came from some ape!?
[/Feigned Indignation and Horror]
And my idea of Prime-mate is gorgeous, rich, deaf-mute who ows a bar.
-Why does she ow the bar? Did she walk into it?
She's also blind...
Which is why I walk around nakit...
just forget it....
The Adamaites you describe would be individuals who engage in heterodoxy (opinions or doctrines that depart from the accepted beliefs or standards).
Normally Adamaism is compatible with the dogmas described in Faiths and Avatars and elsewhere. For example, Auril's dogma commands her clergy to "Quench fire wherever it is found." Adamaist Aurilites can do that, while acknowledging that while fire, too, is part of the Adama, it is their role to serve the part of the Adama that suppresses it (not that I think Auril is very popular in Durpar).
My larger point is that there are individuals who can take the concept of the Adama to its logical conclusions and thereby move from heterodoxy to heresy, which would be individuals who I described in previous posts.
I've come to the conclusion that these individuals don't, in any significant numbers, exist. That's not what the Adama is for. The Adama is a universal life-force, not a god, and worshiping it is like worshiping yourself. Those who need to worship something worship gods, who are designed to be worshiped. The Adama doesn't respond to prayers or ask for sacrifices. It doesn't grant spells or miracles. The gods are the medium between clerics and the Adama, and pious Adamaites will not seek to bypass them - which wouldn't do them any good, anyway.
If an individual worships the Adama as a whole, and -not- an individual "face" of the Adama (that is in game terms does not have a patron deity) then they cannot be part of the first group. They therefore most likely fit in the Faithless group.
I think most such individuals clearly do not fit the definition of Faithless. They are not "individuals who firmly denied any faith or only gave lip service to the gods most of their lives without truly believing." They have a faith that they believe in and the gods are part of it.
If someone believes in the Adama but not the gods that their religion teaches are the faces the Adama shows to mortals, they're guilty of heresy even within the context of the Adamaite faith, and any divine punishment they suffer as a result is well-earned.
If it is true then it raises issues and questions about what we REALLY know about the deities, and brings into question all of the lore we've been told about them. Or at the very least "breaks" the Afterlife as established in lore in previous editions.
I don't believe either of these things are true. In the scheme of things, the question of whether or not all things are connected in a pantheistic sense really doesn't affect either the idea that gods escort their followers into the afterlife or the lore about the gods in general. What I think you're not considering is that the philosophy of the Adama affects all things equally, not just the gods, so the existence of the Adama no more calls into question the nature of Bane or Torm than it calls into question the nature of Elminster or Halaster. Yes, it implies that Bane and Torm are, at some level, the same being, but the same is true of Elminster, Sammaster, Halaster, Wulfgar, and Dove Falconhand - and yet Adamaites manage to react to their fellow human beings in a more or less conventional way. They may believe the gods are privy to greater knowledge about the true nature of reality than mortals are, but even so they're aware that the gods behave in quarrelsome and contrary ways at times, because it is in the nature of the gods to do so.
I think accusations of heresy are exaggerated.
This goes to the heart of the example you wrote about, with the individual who worships both Torm and Tymora with all their heart, in effect taking them both as a patron deity instead of just one. Such an individual is likely to engage in syncretism, perhaps to the Tormites and Tymorians to the north (who are more Orthodox) even going as so far as to engage in heresy. Additionally, what happens to the soul of this individual when they die? Who gets it? Tymora or Torm, or something else entirely?
That's a very good question, and I think it's a flaw in the (very artificial-feeling, in my view) 3rd edition afterlife system, because I don't think such individuals would be at all uncommon even in the North. Being neither faithless nor false, nor necessarily syncretic (the ideals of Torm and Tymora aren't mutually exclusive, and they are worshiped by a common culture with common practices and beliefs). Most individuals of this sort probably believe they end up in some paradisaical afterworld ruled by both their patrons. Perhaps Kelemvor has to choose which afterlife is most appropriate, with the understanding that regardless of which plane the petitioner ends up on, both gods continue to hold a claim on its fate.
Part of the mistake I think is in equating a patron god with a religion. I think any worshiper of the Faerunian pantheon in the north holds a common set of beliefs about the cosmos (including the idea that Kelemvor judges the dead and sends the faithful to the plane of their patron) that should constitute a single religion regardless of which patron they choose. Adamaism is clearly a separate religion that recognizes some of the same gods. So two individuals could both recognize, for example, Shar as their patron goddess but belong to radically different religious faiths. While Shar herself is very concerned with her dogma (share secrets only with the faithful, quench the light of the moon, do not seek to better your lot in life, etc.), I don't think she's very concerned with the larger religious world-view of her followers, and cares little whether or not they believe she is part of a larger gestalt oversoul.
I really don't think belief in the Adama makes that much difference to the Faerunian cosmology. The Adama is an entity that is simultaneously water and fire, heat and cold, law and chaos, heaven and hell, light and dark, babies and diapers, dogs and shoes - in fact, the Adama looks exactly like the world, and as such nobody's perception of the world needs to change to accommodate it.
The Adama would easily begin to evolve into some type of Panentheism or Pantheism. From there heresies could eventually fracture it into some form of monolatry or henotheism, perhaps even evolving to be the first monotheistic faith in the Realms.
Look at the real world. Look at how close some regions are geographically, and the very different religions that emerged from them. Then take a look at a map of Faerûn and the South. The Durpari are more likely to have contact with Mulhorand than the rest of Faerûn. How is the religion of those deities spreading that far south?
Additionally, if one is using the real world as a guide book, how is it not possible that this culturally unique land does not have its own gods? Look at Kara-Tur and Maztica. They are so different that they practically have their own cosmologies (or should). If you take these lands in the context of the whole setting (instead of it being Faerûn centric)... then how is it explained that a unique culture, different from those in the North, did not develop its own unique religion and god(s)?
That really is my way of viewing things. You have a place that is fairly well isolated due to geography, and yet at the same time you've got what seems to be counter-cultural deities and belief systems. It's almost as if you're trying to hammer a square peg through a circle.
Also, for clarification purposes, Faerûn embraces strongly polytheism. We seem to keep making that mistake. :P (I always get the two confused.)
My clause would be that Adamite Invokers would be numerous in the Durpari region, as the panentheistic view of the Adama goes well along with the view of the greater divine thruth, i.e. the function of the different Torilian faiths is to protect its faithfull. Adamite Invokers would be the most loose in their choice of lipservice and would pay dues and homage to both Fearunian, Kara-Turan, Mulhorandi and probably Zakharan gods.
Fearun has a few thruthseekers within the ecclesian clergy who can be divided into the hardline polytheists and those with a more mild view of it. It's frowned apon to develop extensive and radical philosophies about how the divine entities relate to eachother, as enough proof was evident of their relations during the Time of Troubles. The hardliners of the polytheistic faith (true monalatrans) could very well think Adamite views of all gods are part of one as heresy. They would be opposed by the more ecclectic truthseekers (believers that hold myths in critical light) or soft polytheists, that can except new truths of the gods and their origins.
15th century Toril has seen several gods been revealed as others and has had some revelations in support of the more ecclectic truthseekers though, so perhaps the soft polytheists have gained more support over the years after the Spellplague. This might have given the panentheistic Adama more grounds to spread outward into Northern Fearunian areas, depsite resistance of small hardliner polytheistic cults of the old gods.
All of these questions require some level of faith on the part of the faithful. The difference between faith in the Realms and faith in the real world is only one of degree.
A big one, if so. Ed discusses 'faith' and religious experience in the Realms at some length here: seach for "All of the conditions" and then "My recent response to Skeptic".
August 7, 2006: Hello again, fellow scribes. This time Ed answers Skeptic, in the matter of something Ed said in these threads back in 2004:
Skeptic asks: "One of my players is asking me what exactly you mean by "everyone knows" and "really exist"?
There is a subtle difference with "knows" and "everyone in the world believe", what is the most correct one for describing it? (Ex. "Earth is flat, Earth is round"). If it's the first, which proofs are shown to them to make them knows?
Let's say it's prayers' visibles effects: knowing that with spells, a wizard could mimic easily many "divine powers" (like raising dead with a Wish); wouldn't it be possible for common folks to think that there is no Gods and only "wizards who thinks are doing faith-based miracles"?
Let's say it's ToT : Some would argue that seeing Gods walking the land was the ultimate proof, but I doubt Ed were taking it into account in this answer. In the opposite case, it means that the relationship between mortals and Gods really changed during this RSE, if it's the case, I would like to hear Ed about it."
Ed replies:
All of the conditions you mention are possible for players and DMs employing real-world, modern-day thinking, in which belief in a deity (often a 'supreme' or lone deity) is often a matter of faith: believing in a Divine One of some sort through "faith." That is, belief that for many individuals is bolstered more by sermons and interpretations provided by an organized priesthoods than by personal contact with the deity.
Things are different in the Realms. ALL intelligent beings, whether they worship any deity or not, are born and grow up "knowing" the gods are real, and that they manifest or even "walk among us" daily. EVERY intelligent being receives dream-visions that they believe are sent by the gods, among their other dreams. The nature of these visions makes it clear that they are divine in nature (an individual may need or want a priest's interpretation of the meaning of a dream-vision, but does NOT need the priest to confirm it came from a god). In most cases in which an intelligent being prays fervently to a deity (i.e. really meaning the prayer, not cursing or saying something by rote with real attention on something else), there is a manifestation, even if only minor (tingling of excitement from Tymora, rosy glow inside one's head from Lathander, the clang of sword on sword heard in one's head from Tempus, and so on). In other words, the praying being KNOWS they've made contact (perhaps not been heard or heeded or agreed with, and perhaps only with a god's aura or servitors rather than receiving the personal attention of the deity at that moment - - but they've been heard). Individuals who go to temples in which exalted [high-level] clergy perform exacting rituals ("super-prayers," if you will, with sacrifices and beautiful, heart-felt devotions: dances and eloquent pleas and fervent worship) often witness larger and more spectacular manifestations visible to all (surging excitement throughout the very air, and every body of every person, in the temple of Tymora [similar but more lustily stirring sensations in temples of Sune, Sharess, and Loviatar, with differing "tinges," of course]; a rosy glow in the air over the altar in a temple of Lathander; the sounds of battle [shouts, screams, the clang of steel, the thunder of hooves, war-trumpets] being heard out of empty air in a temple of Tempus, with the clang of emphatically crossing swords to mark agreement, recognition of a sacrifice or something promised in a prayer, and so on).
Certainly a cynic could say, "Ah, but it's just the priests doing that with magical trickery! Sure, magic comes from the gods, but so do we all - - and wizards can get the power out of the gods without any of this fawning and obedience!" However, the cynic would have to ignore the dream-visions that come to him, even if he doesn't pray. ALL of the gods are real (their power determined in part by the number and fervency of their worshippers), and the cynic would have to ignore all the signs he sees around him, daily, of the power of the gods (trees shooting up overnight from seeds blessed and planted by a priest that the cynic watched doing the planting, manifestations seen by many, and so on). The cynic could REJECT "the gods," or A god, but that's different than not believing in them.
In our real world, magic of the "instant whizzbang, I hurl my fireball" variety doesn't exist. In the Realms it does. In like manner, deities of the "the Great Xoblob walks past, glowing, and I weep, wet myself, and tremble uncontrollably in the thrall of energies racing through me, just through being brushed past by his divine power" variety certainly don't seem to have daily contact with most of us in the real world; if we believe they exist, we must take it on faith. Folks in the Realms receive far more "daily evidence" to bolster their belief, even if they never knowingly happen to touch or get close to, a deity.
The Time of Troubles wasn't unique in that "gods walked the lands." It was unique in that "Hey, everybody, they're ALL here this time! And they're upset! And they can't go back to where they dwell! And they're lessened in power, and they're fighting each other! RUN FOR THE HILLS!"
It's not that every last goblin or fishwife or elf-child goes through every day thinking they talk to the gods and the gods listen and personally reply; it's that all of those beings cowers at the thought of ever personally coming to the personal attention of any deity, but knows all of the deities are at work around them, all the time, and are immensely powerful, and are best heeded (live life the way the priests say the god wants - - and keep a close eye on the tongues of those priests, who many after all from time to time twist things as we all do, eh? - - and we'll be in good standing with the gods, and they'll do right by us). Life in the Realms is a series of practical choices, forced by situations ("Must eat, so must get food"), and after that a series of moral choices (Chauntea would want me not to chase the raiding goblins across the newly-sewn field, but Helm and Torm and Tempus would all want me to get after them to make sure they don't get away, so... whose creed do I cleave to first?").
In the Realms as in our real world, there are many folk who ignore the gods (and certainly priesthoods and overt worship; aren't the nightly parade of dream-visions, and what I say and do in my dreams in response, enough?) as much as possible and just try to get on with their lives. There are also "true believers" who turn to the veneration of one primary or patron god above all. Most folk are somewhere in the middle, praying when it's prudent (and on special holy days or occasions such as weddings, funerals, and births) and in moments alone when they seek guidance or reassurance or a lifting of their spirits; the rest of the time, they (in the words of Rusgul the Smith) "let the gods see to the doings of the gods, while Rusgul sees to the livelihood and forge-work of Rusgul!"
Now for obvious reasons, with the United States as the primary market for the D&D game, the religious aspects of both the Realms and the religious environment postulated in the core D&D rules (from the beginning) have had to be de-emphasized.
Real people play this game, and decide to sell or ban or otherwise control access to the game by others, and so the game and its provider dare not offend the majority of said people. Moreover, to be heroes, characters (played by the game's players) must be self-willed (as "destiny" and "divine meddling" increase, "free will" and therefore "the freedom to have fun and to act as we want to, and therefore to do heroic or evil things" decreases). Add in the roleplaying possibilities afforded by organized priesthoods (with their own corruption, internal intrigues, and political involvements in the fantasy landscapes D&D campaigns unfold in), and it becomes even more desirable to make the gods "fade into the background" and push their believers (plus devils and demons and other "nasty" servitors we can fight) into the foreground.
So anyone, player or DM, can be forgiven for saying, "But there's nothing much in the printed rules or novels that says life is so gods-heavy in the Realms as all that!" That's quite true. Yet the hints and more than hints are there in all of the gods-specific resources (FAITHS & AVATARS, et al). The extent to which you put active divine involvement into your game is left up to you. As it should be.
(However, to game designers like me who "think Realms" daily, the intial players' questions you posted evoke a reaction along these lines: "Huh? How exactly does he ignore or dismiss his daily prayers, then? How can he even THINK such things?")
So saith Ed.
Offering fictitious pantheistic religious guidance to millions for more than two decades.
love to all,
THO
August 21, 2006: Hi again, all. Well said, Faraer. And by the increasingly long and hairy arm of coincidence, Ed herewith tackles this, from Faraer: "Ed, could you describe the experience of a worship ceremony by a worshipper? (implicit question: is it a profane, essentially social ritual, or do the worshippers experience the presence and myths of the god? or is there a lot of variation?)"
Ed replies:
My recent response to Skeptic (about folk in the Realms "knowing" the gods exist, as opposed to real-world "faith") should have largely answered you, I hope. The short answer is: there is indeed a lot of variation, from deity to deity, and culture to culture, and individual to individual. Worshippers do indeed experience manifestations, visions, dream-visions, and the "feeling of presence" of the divine when they participate in heartfelt rituals (particularly solemn temple rituals, with a lot of other faithful, and led by powerful clergy). Most folk in the Realms, even when they swear casually ("Aww, Talos take me, but 'tis hot!") or heatedly ("Bane's burning balls, man! D'you think I LIKE standing here taking arrows in my shield and shieldarm while you debate which fireball to hurl! Get ON with it!") or even out of habit ("By the untasted dung of Moander!"), make such utterances believing the gods hear. They also, almost certainly, do that swearing thinking the god won't respond to them, because they know the gods hear a lot of it, constantly, and are wise enough to know that it doesn't "count" as much as a ritual (a ritual involving a sacrifice, or personal pain, or intense rapture or concentration or fervor, in particular) does. There are indeed 'rote' social observances (the priest of Talos cries, "All hail Talos! The rains we need come again!" and everyone knee-deep in mud mutters, "All hail Talos," without much enthusiasm), but everyone understands that the Gods Hear All. And conduct themselves accordingly (usually not venerating one god above all others, but primarily worshipping one god due to their professions, or the usual situation or season).
So saith Ed the Ever-Worshipful.
Or Blasphemous, if you prefer.
love to all,
THO
My quibble: Worship in Faerûn is not pantheistic, but more accurately categorized as polytheistic. I always make the same mistake, but I feel correcting it is very important for classification purposes.
Other than that, it seems to be mostly consistent with what I was saying. We have some serious issues existing in the Realms due to the gods ability to manifest themselves so willingly and openly. It really wasn't taken into consideration when a place such as Maztica was shoehorned in, or even taken into consideration dealing with Mulhorand and Kara-Tur.
Yet, because those places exist we have to find a way to logically explain them in a satisfying way that fits the setting.
It's called Adama NT.
Its not only more stable then the regular version, but their hymns aren't half bad either.
The Adama would easily begin to evolve into some type of Panentheism or Pantheism. From there heresies could eventually fracture it into some form of monolatry or henotheism, perhaps even evolving to be the first monotheistic faith in the Realms.
Honestly, I don't think that's likely. The Adama is, as I see it, a pantheistic faith (I don't know about you, but whenever I've said "pantheistic" in this thread, that's exactly what I've meant - and I've been talking about the Adama, not the polytheistic faiths of northern Faerûn. I don't think I ever confuse the two concepts).
Like the Hindu concept of Brahman, the Adama is not a god, and not confused with a god by its practitioners. The concept of Brahman has managed to remain separate from that of gods in (at least some forms of) Hinduism for around 4,000 years now, so I think the Adama can manage it as well. Apparently the Vaishnava schools of Hinduism are parenthetic.
I don't think there's any reason to think the concept of the Adama will ever evolve into anything else. What's likely to happen instead is that individual gods - aspects of the Adama - will be seen as stand-ins for the Adama, so for example various practitioners might worship Cyric as the guiding intelligence that controls the Adama.
Look at the real world. Look at how close some regions are geographically, and the very different religions that emerged from them. Then take a look at a map of Faerûn and the South. The Durpari are more likely to have contact with Mulhorand than the rest of Faerûn. How is the religion of those deities spreading that far south?
The Faerûnian pantheon can use avatars, angels, portals, and miracles to spread themselves as far as they want, so a better question is probably why haven't they spread into places like Maztica, Zakhara, and Kara-Tur to any great extent? If he wanted, Tyr could appear in a burst of glory in Anachrome and establish a thriving cult there. I think the answer must boil down to agreements between the various pantheons to divide the world between them rather than cultural diffusion. So Durpar reveres the Faerûnian pantheon because it's physically located in Faerûn, outside the territory of the other godly tribes. The Mulhorandi pantheon only has jurisdiction in a limited area within Faerûn, and doesn't seem to be able to expand very far out of it.
As for the (what I guess is supposed to be, although it's written in the third person) Ed Greenwood quote, it's interesting that the note about people generally not worshiping one god above the others seems to contradict the view that everyone's required to worship one god above all others in order to be allowed into the afterlife.
The distinction he attempts to draw between belief in the gods in the Forgotten Realms setting and "faith" in the real world is silly. There are plenty of people in the real world who "know" the Divine is real with just as much certainty as the people of the Realms are portrayed as having; real people feel "feelings of presence" and report visitations and miracles, and the average Faerûnian has evidence no better or worse in a qualitative sense than the average person in our world, for reasons I went into earlier (no one can prove where cleric spells or prophetic dreams come from, for example). I don't know if it's illegal in this forum to disagree with Ed Greenwood, but the whole quote is pretty ignorant in my opinion. How can someone say that a Faerûnian's feelings of religious presence are more intense than those real people have, when the religious experience is impossible to qualify objectively? He can control the setting, but he can't control real life enough for his comparisons to always be accurate. However intense your fictional creations' feelings are described as being, a real person's feelings might well be more intense still, and yet faith is still required that you (or your priest/shaman/imam) are interpreting your experience correctly. Faith is always required. The only question is how much.
Personally, I have come up with my own (unofficial guidelines) that explanations why deities have not spread to one region or another of the world. Basically, they need worshipers to do that. We know that before the Faerûnian Pantheon that there were many different human pantheons. The Faerûnian Pantheon is just a huge uber pantheon containing all of the human deities of Faerûn.
Deities (or spirits or whatever happens to be the dominant 'divine-like presence' in the area) have the ability to semi-block things like dream visions of other deities. This means you're not going to have Tyr sending dream visions to someone who follows Qotal the Feathered Dragon.
However, blocking them becomes more difficult if the deity is known to the people and accepted as a deity. This means that after Faerûnian people began to appear in Maztica, and began to try and spread their faiths, it opened the door for the deities to expand.
Once a deity is known it is like a crack in a dam. It starts as a trickle, and it does not take long until it bursts. In some cases this could put two deities into direct conflict with one another. That results in all kinds of wacky problems. You could find the two faiths at each others throat, both claiming to be the representatives of the TRUE sun god. You'd have individuals claiming that they are the same deity, despite any apparent differences. You'd have individuals claiming that they are two separate deities who represent two different aspects of the sun. It varies greatly depending on the deity.
In the end one of two things must happen: one deity must die, one deity must give up competing portfolios, or the deities will merge into one. What happens largely depends on the faithful. Killing off the faithful of an opposing deity and forcing individuals to convert to the 'true faith' is one way to kill an opposing deity. Supporting a heresy that states that the deities are in fact one and the same is another. Supporting a heresy that states that the two separate deities are really different aspects of a portfolio (in this case the sun), which could result in an outcome where one deity may have the portfolio of dawn and the other of dusk. Then a myth would develop that at highsun the dawn deity hands over control of the sun to the dusk deity... or you could suddenly have another deity trying to steal the portfolio of highsun.
In any event, that is how I generally handle such things. I view the gods as somewhat like the Genie from the Disney Movie Aladdin. Phenomenal Cosmic power... at a itty bitty expense. (You are beholden to your worshipers.)
There are some exceptions, of course such as Mystra who is tightly bound to the Weave. Although that still would not prevent her from merging with another deity, or her personality altering due to widespread heresies - she'd still remain the deity of the Weave as it is integral to her existence. The same with Shar and the Night, Selune and the Moon.
First point, disagreeing with Ed can also get you labelled as an infidel, you infidel. :P ;)
Second point, the pantheon of Faerun is only a pantheon in the loosest senses, and doesn't really function as one in the classic sense of the word. Really, their structure, or lack thereof, is what gives me the biggest problem with a pantheistic approach to them.
Third point, in your sun deity example, you're not leaving much room for other outcomes. Both could just as easily decide the struggle just isn't worth it in terms of costs, and both just walk away to leave the status quo intact. Leaving them at the mercy of their followers ultimately strikes me as rather undermining the concept of divinity... and nothing says that divinity has to be unreasonable or incapable of compromise. It hardly has to be some zero-sum game that inevitably draws towards utter victory or defeat... But hey, its your game, do what you want with it.
If two deities of the same portfolio suddenly end up in the same sphere of influence due to the actions of their worshipers, then they are left with only a limited number of choices. Those choices are: Leave Toril (through death or to another sphere), merge together, or alter the portfolio to be different.
My concept of the power of worshipers began to take place after reading Power of Faerûn. That is when we were really introduced to heresies, and there it was hinted at that Araushnee's transformation into Lolth may not have taken place as we believed. Essentially it hinted that it was a cultural change in her worshipers (they began to become more evil), and how they viewed her. Those views began to transform her into Lolth, and mortals simply projected their own mythological spin on it. It never said out right "this is how it happened" but it was clearly flirting with the idea.
Then we were introduced to the various heresies surrounding Amaunator and his return, and how they were impacting Lathander. We know for a fact that Amaunator died (his corpse was floating in the Astral). Thus, what was being said about Lathander was technically false, but he transformed anyway - seemingly he was encouraging it. (Or perhaps the heresy began to have him believe it was true, when it wasn't... in either case, he did not seem to fight it.)
What is clear beyond a shadow of a doubt is that worshipers and their link to the gods has power. It has the power to shape and transform the gods. It also makes sense: otherwise every battle between the gods would be fought through their avatars. It'd always go down like it did in the Time of Troubles. Instead, changes happen over decades and centuries and gods war through their faithful... who are used somewhat like pawns.
Of course, there is plenty of room to compromise. I outlined the three choices a deity is given by Ao, none of which are particularly good. Of course, Ao also has the power to intervene directly and declare a certain outcome, such as forcing two deities to merge into one, or ejecting them from the Realms.
---
This power worshipers have over the gods also fueled my thoughts on devils and demons, which seem to look down upon the gods. That would make sense if they viewed gods as little more than slaves, and the fact that they were not gods (despite being godlike in power on their own planes) they'd view themselves as having more 'freedom' and not having to be a servant.
In the end, the relationship between a deity and his worshipers seems to be symbiotic.
Ergo, it is perfectly acceptable for folks to venerate all of the nature deities, or the gods of learning, or the powers of magic, or the Seldarine, or whatever... within those smaller 'clusters', there is quite a bit of cross-worship. Even the 'Dark Three' shared some worship and temples and areas of control (very strange for evil gods, and yet VERY FR).
So instead of a hierarchy a'la a democratic bureaucracy, with have something more akin to a High School social arrangement, with everyone forming into 'clicks', and very little cross-click socializing (although they are all forced to 'play together' in class... which represents the Realms in this analogy).
Yes... and Ao is the teacher (and his mysterious 'boss' is the principle, etc, etc...).
So even though they must interact on a day-to-day basis, it is highly unlikely for Bane to ask Sune to the prom. :P
FR's Pantheon is a bit strange, but it is still a Pantheon. What it consists of is smaller 'mini-pantheons' that are all part of the over-pantheon.
-This, I disagree on, in the "overpantheon" thing, partially. Really the "Faerûnian Pantheon" described in Faiths and Pantheons is a nonexistent thing. Does an "overpantheon" exist, in that all of these different deities are worshiped on Abeir-Toril? Yes. Do they all "fit" in the same umbrella? Not really. Only if there was a LOT more cultural diffusion. There still are lots of examples of so-and-so being worshiped only in particular places. Overall, the deities aren't as widespread enough to warrant, I think, a moniker such as "Faerûnian Pantheon".
It comes down to Ao's decree: No deity within the same sphere of influence greater than demigod may hold the same portfolio.
If two deities of the same portfolio suddenly end up in the same sphere of influence due to the actions of their worshipers, then they are left with only a limited number of choices. Those choices are: Leave Toril (through death or to another sphere), merge together, or alter the portfolio to be different.
Except that its often not a case of them actually having the same portfolio. Their worshippers may interpret related portfolios as being the same thing, but that doesn't mean they are in a divine sense. Ao assigns portfolios, not followers... they may offer suggestions in their worship as to something a deity may claim or not, but that's about it. If suddenly Cyric's worshippers decided that his nickname gave him rights to being the sun portfolio, do you actually think he would out-of-the-blue just pick up the portfolio of "The Sun" just because a bunch of mortals said so? Not unless Ao said it was okay would that ever happen as far as I recall of the way divinity works.
This power worshipers have over the gods also fueled my thoughts on devils and demons, which seem to look down upon the gods. That would make sense if they viewed gods as little more than slaves, and the fact that they were not gods (despite being godlike in power on their own planes) they'd view themselves as having more 'freedom' and not having to be a servant.
In the end, the relationship between a deity and his worshipers seems to be symbiotic.
And in the end, those demons and devils are just as much servants and slaves as the deities ever are/were, probably even moreso. I tend to interpret that attitude of looking down upon the gods as jealousy more than actual contempt... mockery of that you desire most since you know you'll never get it. That Asmodeus jumped on the chance to become an actual deity is probably telling, unless of course you subscribe to the idea that he went stupid somehow and forgot all those eons of plotting and planning... ;)
As to the relationship between deity and worshipper, of course its symbiotic, especially after Ao altered the way the deities gleaned their power at the end of the Time of Troubles. That doesn't mean he gave those worshippers the ability to parcel out portfolios to their deities of choice though.
Also, they all follow the same set of rules, and all follow the same 'boss'.
Ao makes it a pantheon, if nothing else. Nowhere do you ever find a single being bossing around deities from different pantheons.
As I stated, FR's case is rather unique... but it is still a pantheon.
As to the patheonic temple, it was devoted to Ao, and then converted over to a general use temple so long as you abided by the laws governing acceptable faiths in the City. It wasn't devoted to the pantheon, it was just open to woshippers of any faith. More like a convention center as compared to a guild hall to reference an earlier thread of yours...
Ao makes it a pantheon, if nothing else. Nowhere do you ever find a single being bossing around deities from different pantheons.
As I stated, FR's case is rather unique... but it is still a pantheon.
-Everyone working for the government has President Obama as a boss. That doesn't mean that the people who work for the Department of Defense are a part of the Department of Commerce, the people who work for the Department of Energy aren't a part of the Department of Homeland Security, and so on...
Ao makes it a pantheon, if nothing else. Nowhere do you ever find a single being bossing around deities from different pantheons.
Ao isn't part of the mythology of Faerun. Nobody tells stories about him or teaches acolytes about him in the seminary. He's not Zeus or the Jade Emperor or even the Adama. When people found out about Ao during the Time of Troubles it was a complete shock, every bit as theology-overturning as if on Earth a being came down claiming to be the boss of the Christian, Hindu, Shinto, and Native American gods simultaneously - and then proved it by kicking Jesus, Amaterasu, Quetzalcoatl, and Vishnu out of the heavens.
Ao doesn't resemble any figure in any real-world mythology. That's the point. He doesn't resemble any figure in Toril's mythology either. He's the god the other gods look up to, not a god that mortals were ever intended to know about. He's supposed to be unlike any comparison you can make in real-world religion.
I'll go back to the original "gray box" Forgotten Realms boxed set.
Cyclopedia of the Realms, page 17: "Organized pantheons such as those of the Greek and Norse cultures do not exist in the Forgotten Realms, though there are some natural alliances and factions among the gods." Then it goes on to list these: Mielikki and Eldath serve Silvanus, Torm and Ilmater serve Tyr, Oghma is served by Gond, Milil, and Deneir, Talos is served by Auril, Umberlee, and Malar, etc.
Thus, if you're going to make a comparison to real-life pantheons, it's figures like Silvanus, Tyr, Oghma, and Talos who are the "Zeus" or "Jade Emperor" of the Faerunian gods, not Ao. Ao is something else entirely.
That said, I still say the Faerunian "pantheon" constitutes a single religion that recognizes all these gods as the creators, sustainers, destroyers, and high-ups of the multiverse, believing in a common creation myth (beginning with Selune and Shar), a common belief in Kelemvor as the judge of the dead, the Wall of the Faithless and other theological principles.
Elsewhere on Toril they believe in different groups of gods: the Zakharan gods, the Maztican gods, the various pantheons of Kara-Tur, and so on. And they have different afterlives, different maps of the planes, and other critical differences. And in that sense the Faerunian gods do constitute a pantheon - not because they have a common leader (the Maztican, Zakharan, Kara-Turan and other pantheons are also commanded by Ao, but I certainly wouldn't agree that they're part of the same pantheon as the Faerunians), but because they represent the sum of the deities recognized by a single culture. Which is, of course, the original meaning of "pantheon" - all the gods known, whether they're organized or not.
That said, I still say the Faerunian "pantheon" constitutes a single religion that recognizes all these gods as the creators, sustainers, destroyers, and high-ups of the multiverse, believing in a common creation myth (beginning with Selune and Shar), a common belief in Kelemvor as the judge of the dead, the Wall of the Faithless and other theological principles.
Elsewhere on Toril they believe in different groups of gods: the Zakharan gods, the Maztican gods, the various pantheons of Kara-Tur, and so on. And they have different afterlives, different maps of the planes, and other critical differences. And in that sense the Faerunian gods do constitute a pantheon - not because they have a common leader (the Maztican, Zakharan, Kara-Turan and other pantheons are also commanded by Ao, but I certainly wouldn't agree that they're part of the same pantheon as the Faerunians), but because they represent the sum of the deities recognized by a single culture. Which is, of course, the original meaning of "pantheon" - all the gods known, whether they're organized or not.
This is how I see it as well. If we were to go by the definitions used in Deities & Demigods the Faerûnian Pantheon would be classified as a "loose pantheon." There is no overall leader, just a mass of gods. As Markus pointed out many have formed cliques - essentially mini pantheons (example: the gods of fury, the deities of nature, the gods of knowledge and craft, the Triad, the Dark Three, etc.)
What unites them is a commonly shared myth of creation, and a common acceptance and acknowledgement of most of - if not all of - the deities that exist in the pantheon.
--------------
Stigger-
You are misunderstanding me. I am not saying Ao doesn't have the final choice. He does. I am saying that worshipers have a direct impact on a deity. I think this is a fact that is beyond dispute based on the Risen Sun Heresy and how it transformed Lathander.
However, to use your example: in order for it to work Cyric would have to find a way to convince the bulk of his followers that he is the deity of the Sun. Once that is done, it ultimately comes down to Ao to allow it or not. Now, that is a bit tricky - Cyric could send all his faithful dream visions and call it divine revelation, but Ao likely would not grant him the portfolio in that case. However, if a handful of worshipers were swayed and then went out to convince others, and then over time others began to believe the heresy true (which would be supported by Cyric)... then yes, Ao would most likely grant it provided the bulk of Cyric's worshipers acknowledge him to be in that role. Assuming, of course, no other deity currently held the portfolio or was also trying to stake a claim.
-----
Cyric the Dark Sun God Dogma: Death to all who oppose the Dark Sun. Bow down before his supreme power, and yield to him the blood of those that do not. The Dark Sun rises in the east and sets in the west, casting shadows over the realm. All light casts a shadow, and the Dark Sun is the shadow slowly moving across the world. Fear and obey his priests, slay the weak, the good, and false prophets. Hide not in darkness, but in the open, for it is the last place your enemies will suspect. Fear and obey the clergy of Cyric, and bring death to those that oppose his church for Cyric is the only true authority. Break not into open rebellion, for marching armies move the false gods to action. Fell one foe at a time and keep all folk afraid, uneasy, and in constant strife. Any method or means is justified if it brings about the desired end.
As to Ao and Cyric... I don't think Ao gives a crap what Cyric's worshippers think or believe, nor would it make any difference to him if his worshippers wanted him to be a sun god or not. He's kind of like the divine Supreme Court in that respect, he doesn't care what the electorate wants, he only goes by what the Constitution says.
As to the other stuff, I wasn't aware of the commonly shared creation myth... unless we're talking about the whole Sisters of Light and Darkness thing, in which case I'm not sure I'd call it a creation myth per se, at least not in the classical mythological sense in respects to a pantheon.
As to the other stuff, I wasn't aware of the commonly shared creation myth... unless we're talking about the whole Sisters of Light and Darkness thing, in which case I'm not sure I'd call it a creation myth per se, at least not in the classical mythological sense in respects to a pantheon.
Yes, that's what I meant. In what sense is it not a creation myth? It's a myth that explains how the world was created. That seems to be all the salient criteria.
Good analogy.
-Wow, a rare compliment from Stigger. Is it a holiday or something?
And no, its not a holiday, I just call 'em like I see 'em. As they say, even the blind chicken occassionally gets a kernel of corn. :P
But let's step back and look at things from a larger picture to understand how the Faerûnian pantheon came about. Unlike the real world we're dealing with deities that can actually physically and magically interact with the world. These are real beings, there is no disputing that fact - there are no atheists on Faerûn. You're not going to set sail while claiming that Umberlee doesn't exist. Otherwise, you're libel to find yourself at sea and in a whole lot of trouble. (Umberlee sends dream visions to everyone on the ship, making it clear that a certain individual has displeased her, and then everyone awakes to a sudden violent storm threatening to destroy the vessel... resulting in the crew throwing said individual overboard to sacrifice to Umberlee while begging her for mercy.)
Now, if Umberlee has the power to do this why isn't she worshiped anywhere and everywhere that there are seas and oceans? Since she isn't her power is obviously limited to a geographical area. She isn't commanding the seas off the coast of Kara-Tur or Evermeet, for example, but along the Sword Coast? Yes, absolutely.
We also know that there have been more than one sea deity worshiped in Faerûn. What happened to them? Why / how did Umberlee replace them? Well, we know that more than one deity greater than demigod cannot hold the same portfolio and be in the same sphere of influence. So obviously one of three things have happened to the other deities: they left Toril or died (from conflict with another deity, from lack of worship, or battles with Umberlee's faithful and allies), they merged with Umberlee or another deity, or Umberlee and the deity agreed (or were forced) to modify their portfolios so that they are no longer in conflict (and then one of the two previous things happened).
We also know that other human pantheons existed, a few examples being the Netherese (which is where Shar, Selune, and Jergal came from), Jhaamdathian (which is where Auppenser came from), Untheric (which is where Hoar and Tiamat came from), and vague nods to various other pantheons which gave us any number of interloper deities such as Ilmater and Tyr.
The fact that many of these deities were once considered to be part of separate pantheons and are now seen as part of a larger uber pantheon... says something. I think we could even go as far as to say that a pantheon on Toril basically is nothing more than deities who share the same sphere of influence. Which means you could potentially be a member of two different pantheons at the same time.
Now, here is my theory on how the Faerûnian pantheon formed.
The Dawn Cataclysm took place after the fall of Netheril, and is often attributed to Lathander because during this event he attempted to reshape the Faerûnian Pantheon. What better time to do such a thing than at its formation? My argument is that the dawn cataclysm is something that took place over a period of decades, perhaps centuries. Netheril had fallen, its people were scattering, and there was a lot of sudden trade and mobility in Faerûn. Different human cultures were for the first time establishing strong trading ties, people were immigrating from different parts of Faerûn, all of this meant that the gods were on the move as well.
The spheres of influence between many different deities began to cross and overlap. Ao's rule and law of only one deity above demigod, from the same pantheon, can hold the same portfolio came into full effect. That inevitably led to turmoil and clashes, resulting in what eventually became known as the Dawn Cataclysm. During those events, when things were chaotic, Lathander and his clergy hatched a plan (which was most likely foiled by Shar) to seize control and reshape the emerging pantheon to suit his goals.
Overtime, individual creation myths fell away as the Netherese creation myth spread and became accepted by other faiths outside of those who had originally embraced Netherese deities.
That is my explanation as to how the Faerûnian pantheon formed.
I hope all of that made sense. It is rather difficult to explain in a concise way.
My answer to that question is this: They can't. They need their worshipers. If you take what I said about the dawn cataclysm and the cross pollination of different cultures with their own gods... ultimately resulting in the Faerûnian Pantheon... then the same thing should apply.
Faerûnian's obviously share a very similar culture. There are local differences, to be sure, but they share a common set of core beliefs when it comes to religion. Ilmater might be worshiped slightly different in one area or another, but he is still Ilmater. A deity might have an alias here or there, such as Assuran / Hoar does. But in the end they're the same deity.
Now, if you were to accept that worshipers are the ones responsible for the spread of their deities faith, and not the god himself / herself... then there is another logical conclusion to draw. Worshipers have some power and sway over the deity.
It can be debated exactly how much sway or power the worshipers have over a god, but the fact that they have the ability to influence them is, I believe, well established. Not only by my previous words here but also in canon.
So, if you take to heart that worshipers have the ability to influence a deity... exactly how much can they do it, and how exactly does work?
Those are questions that I was speculating on.
I do not believe that there are any hard and fast rule, but I do believe that there are some guidelines.
For example, I believe that if the bulk of a deities worshipers begin to believe something different about a deity, that deity has the potential to be altered. This could resulting in anything from losing portfolios, gaining portfolios, altering portfolios, altering alignment or merging with another deity.
You could have some events such as those dealing with Lathander and the Risen Sun heresy, which we know canonically was false (because Amaunator's corpse was in the Astral), modifying a deity radically. In that particular case it seemed that Lathander was embracing the heresy. Now, we can debate and speculate as to his reasoning, I have my own theories and ideas on the matter, but they do not really pertain to this discussion.
We also have, canonically, the suggestion that it was Araushnee's worshipers that played a role in her transformation. And we also have the other heresies.
We know that a competing deity can grant divine power to a group of individuals who do not worship him / her, but believe in the heresies of another deity. (For example, I believe Cyric is the one granting power to a heresy involving Ilmater.) Of course, the faithful mortal worshipers may or may not know that is the case, but it is clear that the deities can play a game of divine politics this way using mortals as pawns.
Now, what happens as a result? Can a deity be influenced or changed or modified as a result of those actions? Well, that is debatable.
I personally believe that a deity has the right to deny such heresies, protecting themselves. However, it is also possible should that heresy spread that an aspect of a deity could form, literally giving birth to a new deity.
I believe under most cases this happens when a deity is using an alias. A deity typically seems to use an alias when his or her worshipers are from a different culture, and interpret / worship them differently than their normal churches would generally allow.
However, what happens if those worshipers begin to stray even further? What happens if they begin to ascribe new domains / portfolios to an alias? What happens if they begin to interpret the alias as a different alignment? In those cases, I believe the deity has the ability to accept the heresy (thus changing themselves) or forging an aspect.
An aspect is literally a separate entity from the main deity. I believe that aspects exist in various states, some may exist and share their power with their host deity, or may split entirely and give birth to a completely new and separate deity.
That could be a potential danger and pitfall when expanding your worship into a radically different culture. Mortals are likely to interpret a deity through a lens that they best understand. If they have a creation mythology, belief of the afterlife, or something that is different either slightly or radically from traditionally held beliefs then such things are possible.
To bring this discussion full circle, an example exists here. Oghma is worshiped under the alias of Curna and Selune is worshiped under the alias of Lucha by the Durpari. Their worship in those lands is not radically different than their worship further north, but there are subtle differences in both the practices and views of the deity.
In the end, much of this comes down to Ao. He always has the final say, but the above is a list of possibilities and guidelines of what could happen, why, and how when faced with certain situations.
These are my views based on what we know.
The Pantheon= a divine 'Government'
Last time I checked, the Dept. of Defense and the Dept. of Commerce were both still part of the SAME Gov't.
And Gods do not have to be family - thats a BAD misconception. You guys need to broaden your mythological reading. MOST pantheons are unrelated (for the most part).
To believe otherwise is very... Greco-Roman... of you. ;)
If you have a group of gods that adhere to the rules of one 'supreme god' (Odin, Zeus, etc), and they all have seperate duties and interact within the confines of those duties (and all the FR gods do interact with one-another), then that is, by definition, a Pantheon.
The thing that makes this somewhat confusing is D&D's Cosmology - in it, some gods can be members of more then one Pantheon. There are RW instances of that, but it's pretty rare.
In fact, the Norse had two seperate pantheons - the Aesir, and the Vanir, and at least three members of the Vanir were also Aesir.
Stop trying to define everything in terms of the well-known Greek pantheon. Gods do not need to be family, they just have to work together, and in a very loose (and sometimes cofrontational) way, the FR gods do just that.
Besides, Ed Greenwood himself has stated that most folks of the Realms pay lip-service to all the gods, depending on the situation. There is even one canon priest (in the old grey box) who worships two seperate deities. There's also that Drow that worships Eilistraee, and yet is a Chosen of Mystra.
How can you possibly say that Faerûn isn't Pantheonic in nature?
Faerûnian's obviously share a very similar culture. There are local differences, to be sure, but they share a common set of core beliefs when it comes to religion.
-This is something that I think leads to what I personally think is faulty thinking, in believing/accepting that such a thing as the "Faerûnian Pantheon" exists as a 'unified group'. It's not that what you said is wrong, but I think that's only the tip of the iceberg. Many places share similar cultures, but just how deep is that breadth of information in novels and game books? Not very deep. I am a big proponent of things like the "Southern Magic" feat, or mentions that southerners distrust/dislike northerners, to a degree, and so on, things like that. Just using the U.S. as an example, I am culturally quite different from someone from elsewhere in the country. Myself, and someone from...Texas, we might share a couple of those common core beliefs/traits that perhaps most Americans share. When you get a bit deeper, more dissimilarities begin appearing than similarities. Using the stereotypical "King of the Hill" personification for Texans, as opposed to the stereotypical portrayal of New Yorkers, there's a lot different. I think that if more information existed about specific mannerisms, beliefs, traits, and so on, of different Human ethnic groups and different cities, there'd be less "in common", and thus, less of an emphasis of an what I think is an imaginary "Faerûnian Pantheon", which would be replaced by more information on/more of an emphasis on specific "City/Nation Pantheons", or "Regional Pantheons".
Actually, I thought it was the usual strawman analogy.
The Pantheon= a divine 'Government'
Last time I checked, the Dept. of Defense and the Dept. of Commerce were both still part of the SAME Gov't.
-Your statement: "Ao makes it a pantheon, if nothing else. Nowhere do you ever find a single being bossing around deities from different pantheons."
-Pantheon are "racially based or culturally based, often with strong geographic connections. A deity who is not member of a pantheon venerated by a particular race or culture or in a certain geographic region can still have worshipers among that race, culture, or in that region" (F&P, 04).
-The only reasoning for a "Human Pantheon" would be that all Humans are Human, and thus, all Human deities they worship are worshiped by Humans, thus making them the "Human Pantheon". To broad. Next, we have a "Human Pantheon" that is created because all Humans share the same culture, and are more-or-less, the same. See my response to Meldred, above, which applies to geographical location as well.
-Using that same logic, sociologists and anthropologists can group the Hindu, Japanese, Aztec, Norse, Egyptian, and other specific pantheons into one large grouping, a "Human Pantheon", because all are deities worshiped by Humans, at one point or another, on Earth. That isn't done, though- Too broad.
-Governmental agencies are all under "one roof", as the saying goes. Just because they are all led by the ultimate executive in the country, the president, doesn't mean that all of these various agencies are synonymous. If you want to utilize the broad term 'government agency', then sure, the Department of Defense, Department of State, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, Department of the Treasury, and so on, all are 'government agencies' and fit under that umbrella. If you want to use broad terminology, a lot of things can be grouped together, that wouldn't be if more concise language was used.
If you have a group of gods that adhere to the rules of one 'supreme god' (Odin, Zeus, etc), and they all have seperate duties and interact within the confines of those duties (and all the FR gods do interact with one-another), then that is, by definition, a Pantheon.
-The "Faerûnian Pantheon" is lacking that 'supreme deity' that you mentioned. Ao isn't the pantheon head. If he were included as the pantheon head of the "Faerûnian Pantheon", then he should be the pantheon head of every pantheon- and we know that's not the case. So, discard Ao, who isn't a deity, but an overdeity, anyway, and falls into a whole different tier of existence and whatnot. So, who is the pantheon head of the "Faerûnian Pantheon"? Lathander? Bane? Mystra? It begins to be hard to be a pantheon in the D&D when there isn't much organization, or a pantheon leader. When you break things down a bit, and start getting into more localized, or niche groupings (pantheons!), individuals like leaders become more apparent and existent.
How can you possibly say that Faerûn isn't Pantheonic in nature?
-That's precisely it; there is more than "one big pantheon", there's "lots of little pantheons".
Without going into detail over it, I would disagree with the basic tenet that deities cannot spread their own faith. That their worshippers are the primary spreaders of the faith, I wouldn't dispute, but were that the case, Tyr could never have come to Faerun at the head of a crusade. They can spread their own worship, they just usually don't bother to, given the number of toes that would be stepped on and the disputes it would cause (in all likelihood) on a divine level. The whole division of lands between the Mulhorandi and Faerunian pantheons, and divinely agreed upon areas of influence suggested to me that there was a lot more to it than just having a worshipper or two someplace. That Ao even divided the world up into geographic spheres of influence suggests that simply having worshippers someplace isn't necessarily a guarantee of actually having much power in a given place if its outside of your 'assigned' area, unless the native pantheon says its okay.
My brain is imploding. :P
Okay, look at it this way. Let me try and explain what I am trying to say / do here. Take a setting like Eberron for example. It was built from the top down. Everything was well thought out, everything makes logical sense. Hell, they even went so far as to make D&D magic make sense for the setting.
Then take something like FR, something that was built from the bottom up. It started with Ed's original creation, and then over time it has been added to by at least a dozen people if not more. In many cases things were simply shoehorned into the setting with no regard for the impact. The place is a mess.
That is where I've come in. I'm looking at this mess, and seeing things that simply don't make any sense. If Umberlee, as an example, has the ability to spread her own faith then why does she need clerics? If Umberlee can spread her own faith why isn't she worshiped all across the world as she is worshiped in Faerûn? You could say that Ao or the gods came to an agreement and created the spheres of influence, but then you have situations such as when the Helmites began their conversions in Maztica. How do you explain that?
That's essentially what I'm attempting to do... I'm trying to logically make it work based on what we have before us. Though, obviously, I am thinking more deeply about the situation than 99.9% of FR fans will ever think about it. :P
-This is something that I think leads to what I personally think is faulty thinking, in believing/accepting that such a thing as the "Faerûnian Pantheon" exists as a 'unified group'. It's not that what you said is wrong, but I think that's only the tip of the iceberg. Many places share similar cultures, but just how deep is that breadth of information in novels and game books? Not very deep. I am a big proponent of things like the "Southern Magic" feat, or mentions that southerners distrust/dislike northerners, to a degree, and so on, things like that. Just using the U.S. as an example, I am culturally quite different from someone from elsewhere in the country. Myself, and someone from...Texas, we might share a couple of those common core beliefs/traits that perhaps most Americans share. When you get a bit deeper, more dissimilarities begin appearing than similarities. Using the stereotypical "King of the Hill" personification for Texans, as opposed to the stereotypical portrayal of New Yorkers, there's a lot different. I think that if more information existed about specific mannerisms, beliefs, traits, and so on, of different Human ethnic groups and different cities, there'd be less "in common", and thus, less of an emphasis of an what I think is an imaginary "Faerûnian Pantheon", which would be replaced by more information on/more of an emphasis on specific "City/Nation Pantheons", or "Regional Pantheons".
I think that's the wrong way of looking at it. It is true that most deities have strong centers of worship in different locations, for example you're going to have the nature deities more visible in more rural communities than you are in a large city. Yet, -all- Faerûnian's agree that the gods exist, and while it may be odd to find a Cleric of Umberlee in the middle of the desert, those individuals will still understand Umberlee as part of the larger pantheon.
However, imagine for example Qotal's faith spreading from Maztica to Faerûn. That deity is going to seem -very- out of place, and is not going to be readily viewed as part of the pantheon. If Qotal was to be integrated into the larger Faerûnian pantheon he would have to undergo some changes.
-The "Faerûnian Pantheon" is lacking that 'supreme deity' that you mentioned. Ao isn't the pantheon head. If he were included as the pantheon head of the "Faerûnian Pantheon", then he should be the pantheon head of every pantheon- and we know that's not the case. So, discard Ao, who isn't a deity, but an overdeity, anyway, and falls into a whole different tier of existence and whatnot. So, who is the pantheon head of the "Faerûnian Pantheon"? Lathander? Bane? Mystra? It begins to be hard to be a pantheon in the D&D when there isn't much organization, or a pantheon leader. When you break things down a bit, and start getting into more localized, or niche groupings (pantheons!), individuals like leaders become more apparent and existent.
This is a total misconception. You don't NEED to have a defined leader or any organization -at all- in order to be a pantheon. If you read Deities and Demigods this is classified as a lose pantheon. A contrast to a lose pantheon is a tight pantheon, such as the Mulhorandi pantheon which is led by Horus-Re.
I think that's the wrong way of looking at it. It is true that most deities have strong centers of worship in different locations, for example you're going to have the nature deities more visible in more rural communities than you are in a large city. Yet, -all- Faerûnian's agree that the gods exist, and while it may be odd to find a Cleric of Umberlee in the middle of the desert, those individuals will still understand Umberlee as part of the larger pantheon.
-Would a person living in the desert acknowledge that Umberlee exists? If he/she knows of her, sure. Most Faerûnians don't have problems acknowledging the existence of lots of deities. Does a person living in the desert acknowledging that Umberlee is indeed a deity somehow translate into Umberlee "fitting" into a theoretical pantheon that literally has a potpourri of members? I don't agree, no. A person accepting that Umberlee exists does not equate her being inserted into a theoretical "Human Pantheon". Many non-Elves recognize the validity of the existence of Corellon Larethian, let's use for argument's sake. That a non-Elf understands that Corellon Larethian exists doesn't then place Corellon Larethian into the larger pantheon of deities that Humans believe in/understand exist. That would be a grouping, yes, but that's an extremely broad criterion to use to define what a pantheon is. You'd have virtually every deity in existence in it, given once more that most people don't have problems believing in the existence of every which deity, major and minor.
However, imagine for example Qotal's faith spreading from Maztica to Faerûn. That deity is going to seem -very- out of place, and is not going to be readily viewed as part of the pantheon. If Qotal was to be integrated into the larger Faerûnian pantheon he would have to undergo some changes.
-I disagree, in that there is a large pantheon that Qotal would be seen as not fitting into- let's not forget, this is the "Faerûnian Pantheon", where Bane coexists with Torm, who coexists with Mask, who coexists with Lathander, who coexists with Ubtao, and so on. Let's go to Amn, where there's a decent amount of Maztican influence, in goods, ideas, and actual people living there. Why would certain Amninians have a problem accepting Qotal, a Lawful Good deity of health, and goodness? If we move over to Thay, is a Thayvian going to have some problems? It's likely. Silverymoon? Probably not. Chult? Probably. This, I think, further lends to the concept that one massive all-encompassing "Faerûnian Pantheon" is a misnomer, and that smaller, regional/cultural pantheons are more apt. The people in Amn, Thay, Silverymoon and Chult are all different, culturally as well as geographically. The deities that are prevalently worshiped in those places differ as well.
This is a total misconception. You don't NEED to have a defined leader or any organization -at all- in order to be a pantheon. If you read Deities and Demigods this is classified as a lose pantheon. A contrast to a lose pantheon is a tight pantheon, such as the Mulhorandi pantheon which is led by Horus-Re.
-As stated in my above response, if you want to apply loose terms, any and every deity can be lumped together in a massive grouping as existing in Realmspace. This does not a pantheon make, in my opinion. As Faiths and Pantheons said, a pantheon is a specific grouping of deities that is "racially based or culturally based, often with strong geographic connections." Using MT's example above, every deity can be mushed into one big group, because they all exist in Realmspace, and "serve" under Ao. This definition of pantheon is far too broad. It does not take into account racial, cultural, or geographic ties, which pinpoints the precise definition of pantheon, in D&D terms here. Defining things a bit more, to including only Human deities, I don't think it is precise enough, which is the crux of our difference of opinions. There is far more racial/cultural/geographic pinpointing that can be done, to eliminate instances where deities like Ubtao are not considered in the same "pantheon" as deities like Uthgar- both have worship bases that are fairly exclusive, and localized. It's almost like math- I want things to be reduced to their lowest forms, finding the larger, "all-inclusive" terminology to be too broad, to the point of silliness.
You say "a pantheon is a specific grouping of deities that is racially based or culturally based, often with strong geographic connections."
I am not disagreeing. Faerûn is a geographical location, that when taken in the context of Toril in its entirety is quite small. There is a lot of cross cultural pollination due to trade and immigration. Certain deities are more popular in regions than others, but those from Faerûn would still regard them as -their- deities. Whereas you may have Corellon Larethian also being worshiped in many of the same areas humans from Faerûn are still viewing him as an -elven deity-. Not one of their own.
The same is true of deities from Kara-Tur and Maztica, both of which are human dominated. A deity from Maztica, Mulhorand, Kara-Tur or Zakhara would not be viewed as a -Faerûnian- deity. That's the difference. People view them together as a loosely associated group. No, there is no leader. It's only a pantheon in the loosest sense of the word, and within the pantheon you have little cliques forming (the Triad, the Dark Three, the Gods of Fury, etc) but they are -still- a pantheon.
To go back to your example of a New Yorker and a Texan, yes there are some cultural differences, but such are -very- minor. It is no where near as extreme as say, someone born and raised in rural Afghanistan. This is exactly the same thing. Faerûn's culture is very similar, regardless of where you go. Sure, there are different forms of government and different views on morality, but it is no where as extreme as say Maztica or Kara-Tur. Everyone believes in the same afterlife (and that Kelemvor is the god of the dead), virtually everyone accepts the War of Light and Darkness creation myth, etc.
Jump over to Mulhorand and most Mulhorandi are going "Kelemvor who?" - go to Maztica and Kara-Tur and they're going to be even more perplexed.
Generally, when I think of the Sisters of Light and Darkness tale, I tend to think of it as wishful thinking on the part of humans to 'compete' with the age of dwarven and elven mythologies... its a human, and hence very young and probably incorrect in most respects, myth that doesn't really hold much water in my book.
I don't think it matters whether or not the myth "holds water." It only matters that people who believe in the Faerunian pantheon believe in it.
The thing about myths, they're true even if they never actually happened.
I think we could even go as far as to say that a pantheon on Toril basically is nothing more than deities who share the same sphere of influence. Which means you could potentially be a member of two different pantheons at the same time.
Indeed. Tiamat, for example, is a member of both the draconic and Untheric pantheons (or was, when the Untheric pantheon existed), as well as the Faerûnian pantheon. Selûne is a member of both the Faerûnian and Zakharan pantheons.
And yes, the designers of Deities and Demigods were clearly thinking of the Faerûnian pantheon when they defined "loose pantheons," considering they mention the Forgotten Realms gods and the Fugue Plane specifically in that section. I don't completely agree with them when they describe a loose pantheon as "a number of small, distinct religions, each devoted to one deity" - while there are elements of that, there is also plenty of polytheistic worship of multiple deities in the pantheon, which is more like their definition of a "tight pantheon."
I assume that every believer in the Faerûnian mythos believes in some version of the Sisters of Light and Darkness story if only because it's so emphasized in recent materials. There are other creation stories - the scaly races believe in the World Serpent, the Mulhorandi credit creation to Re, and the dwarves say Moradin forged the world - but they seem associated with other pantheons (the scalykind gods, the Mulhorandi pantheon, and the Morndinsamman respectively).
However, it's possible by assumption is wrong, and for example worshipers of Cyric tell the story of the Black Sun creating the world from the corpses of his yet-unborn enemies; and worshipers of Akadi talk about the primal forces of Earth, Water, and Fire forming the world with the indispensable help of the greatest element, air; and worshipers of Tyr tell the story of Odin, Vili, and Ve slaying the primordial Ymir; and worshipers of Tymora have a story about Gaea and Uranus fathering the Titans - but there's nothing in canon to support this (and I think the memory of the Norse and Greek pantheons among followers of Tyr and Tymora wouldn't be nearly so clear - more likely, the Tyrites would speak of Selûne and Shar slaying a primordial and creating the world from its corpse, for example, and the generations of gods the Tymorites would name in their Theogony would be Faerûnian ones rather than Greek ones).
I simply seized on the bit where Selune reaches into the plane of fire to get the flames that kindled the sun. Of course, you know - Kossuth, the greatest and wisest of the gods, becomes the savior of creation and fire becomes the light that holds back the darkness and Shar. :P
My brain is imploding. :P
That's essentially what I'm attempting to do... I'm trying to logically make it work based on what we have before us. Though, obviously, I am thinking more deeply about the situation than 99.9% of FR fans will ever think about it. :P
Excellent, my plan is working then... :evillaugh
On to the rest. See, now amusingly, that's exactly what I try to do. We're just choosing to accept different versions as 'correct', and others as 'incorrect'. Personally, I view Maztica as a huge mistake that should have been retconned into something less... conquistador, because its really the odd-man out in terms of pantheonic territorialism.
As to Umberlee not being worshipped everywhere, why would she be? That she's dominant in Faerun is not an immediate indicator that she has to be dominant everywhere (or anywhere) else. Maybe she doesn't make sense with the way other cultures view the Sea, and so is limited in where she can expand to simply by sympathetic philosophy principles. That Trishinia and Deep Sashelas are around and actively opposed to her should tell us quite a bit about what she's actually capable of in terms of power.
@ Rip
I'd definitely agree on a philosophical level that all creation myths are true, and all are equally false, so long as someone believes in them. In terms of FR canon though, I'm not quite so generous, which is the only context I'm speaking of here.
I'd definitely agree on a philosophical level that all creation myths are true, and all are equally false, so long as someone believes in them. In terms of FR canon though, I'm not quite so generous, which is the only context I'm speaking of here.
I'm not sure what you're getting at here. I gave the War of the Sisters myth as an example of a common creation myth among believers in the Faerunian pantheon, and you said:
I'm not sure I'd call it a creation myth per se, at least not in the classical mythological sense in respects to a pantheon.
I asked you to explain how it wasn't a creation myth, and your reply, essentially, was that you didn't think it was true.
How does that make it not a creation myth? If your argument is that it's not a universal belief among followers of the human deities of Faerun, that's debatable, but it makes some sense - but you didn't argue that. You never said people didn't believe in it, only that you thought they were wrong, and that... well, you didn't really link that to your previous argument in any way, so I'm not completely sure that you're saying "it's not a creation myth because it's not true." Is this really your argument? If it's not, I have no idea what you're trying to say here, unless you just got distracted halfway through the discussion and started talking about why you didn't like the War of the Sisters myth, rather than trying to explain why it wasn't, in fact, a creation myth "in the classical sense in respects to a pantheon."
It doesn't seem intrinsically different from any other creation myth to me. Is your problem that some of the Faerunian gods are interlopers and not directly descended from Selune or Shar? If that's the problem, I don't think that matters (for example, in Norse mythology, the Vanir aren't descended from any of the participants of the slaying-of-Ymir myth as far as we know). But you didn't say that was the problem, and I don't want to put words in your mouth. I'm just confused.
I am not disagreeing that many of the deities in the Faerûnian Pantheon more often than not have worship focused in a regional location. I'd classify Chult as an anomaly to that argument, along with those which appears very close to, in and over the Spine of the World.
-And this is the crux, more or less, of why I feel "Faerûnian Pantheon" is a misnomer. Specific deities have specific bastions of worship in specific areas. Just like, in the past, there were such things as the Netherese Pantheon, the Jhaamdathan Pantheon, the Untheric Pantheon, and currently, there are such things as the Mulhorandi Pantheon. Cultural barriers still exist such that there is no such thing as a true "Faerûnian Pantheon", where members of the theoretical pantheon are worshiped all throughout Faerûn. Rather, smaller pantheons, such as the Calashite Pantheon, the Pantheon of the Sword Coast, the Pantheon of the Shining South, and so on, are more apt. There is likely to be a great deal over overlap in some places, and with some deities, but I feel that, keeping the debate only within Humans on Faerûn, plenty of walls still exist, tied to culture and region. Were more of these walls to crumble, a "Human Pantheon" would be more likely, but you'd get less variance from place to place- something I personally wouldn't want to see (I like my Mulhorands, my Calimshans, my Chults, and so on). And, were that the case, I'd have no problem with calling it as such. There still are plenty of deities (major and minor) who's worship fluctuates greatly as you move around the continent.
The same is true of deities from Kara-Tur and Maztica, both of which are human dominated. A deity from Maztica, Mulhorand, Kara-Tur or Zakhara would not be viewed as a -Faerûnian- deity. That's the difference. People view them together as a loosely associated group. No, there is no leader. It's only a pantheon in the loosest sense of the word, and within the pantheon you have little cliques forming (the Triad, the Dark Three, the Gods of Fury, etc) but they are -still- a pantheon.
-Like I said, it is a definition that I do not find sufficient. This "loose pantheon" concept is something that I have disdain towards, especially in this specific case, where that the "loose pantheon" can much easily be further reduced to smaller "tight pantheons", of smaller geographic and cultural areas of influence. Many smaller "tight" pantheons make up a "loose" pantheon, and not the other way around- the smaller pieces should make up the whole, design philosophy wise.
-I see it akin to calling all of the various deities that can be found in Asia- the Jade Emperor (Chinese Taoism), Krishna (Indian Hinduism), Fujin (Japanese Shinto), Pho La (Tibetan Bon), Allah (Middle-Eastern Islam), Elohim (Middle-Eastern Judiasm), Jesus (Russian East Orthodoxy), Ahura Mazda (Middle-Eastern Zoroastrianism), the Father of Greatness (Middle-Eastern Manichaeism)- the "Asian Pantheon". The Jade Emperor, Krishna, Fujin, Pho La, Allah, Elohim, Jesus, Ahura Mazda, the Feather of Greatness, and a whole slew of others, they are all members of the "Asian Pantheon".
1. The official books say there is.
2. If there weren't, Ao would allow separate gods of the same portfolio within the various "sub-pantheons." He doesn't, which indicates a single pantheon by the overpower's standards.
However, I agree that there are a number of distinct separate faiths in Faerûn that haven't been incorporated into the Faerûnian pantheon to any significant degree. For example:
1. The Mulhorandi pantheon, obviously.
2. The Chultan pantheon.
3. The Uthgardt pantheon.
There may be others that I'm not considering. You might be right that the Calashite pantheon is distinctive enough to be considered separate; I don't know the region well enough to say.
While the Adama faith is definitely a distinct religion, it recognizes the same gods as the Faerûnian pantheon (sometimes under different names). I'm willing to consider that some of the ostensibly renamed deities are actually separate beings, in which case apparently Ao's prohibition doesn't apply, thus proving that the Durpari revere a separate, albeit heavily overlapping, pantheon.
But I don't think it's enough to bring up individual exceptions to claim that there's no Faerûnian pantheon. The existence of Mulhorand alone is proof that exceptions exist, but Mulhorand is an exceptional nation in many ways. The exceptions, I think, in this case prove the rule. I think if you're going to claim the existence of regional mini-pantheons, it's necessary to explain why you think they're different enough to qualify as pantheons in their own right. While this is subjective, explaining your reasoning would help illuminate this issue for all of us. Possible reasons include gods worshiped nowhere else (as in Chult and among the Uthgardt), a lack of gods worshiped just about everywhere else, a radically different racial background or cosmological view, etc.
I think it's apparent that the Sword Coast, Dalelands, Cormyr, Lantan, Thay, Ulgarth, Halruaa, and so on all revere essentially the same gods. They're certainly not as different as Hinduism and Islam, or Shinto and Zoroastrianism, or even as different as Christianity and Judaism. They have identical views on the cosmos, the afterlife, the role and origin of the gods, and so on in ways that the Zakharans and Faerûnians don't - this seems to me to be a non-arbitrary, very natural dividing line between regional variations in the same pantheon and completely different pantheons.
I think the idea that the Faerûnian unrelated group of deities isn't a pantheon while the Zakharan unrelated group of deities is, is simple ethnocentrism, like assuming your home region is the only place in the world where no-one has an accent. To an outsider the Faerûnians obviously have a tremendous amount in common religiously; their region is distinctive in the same way the Mazticans, Zakharans, and Mulhorandi are also distinctive.
I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
You'll have to excuse me there... I have been a bit distracted over the last few days. I'll just say that trying to get power of attourney over a relative, even a mostly willing one, is a freaking convoluted nightmare.
How does that make it not a creation myth? If your argument is that it's not a universal belief among followers of the human deities of Faerun, that's debatable, but it makes some sense - but you didn't argue that. You never said people didn't believe in it, only that you thought they were wrong, and that... well, you didn't really link that to your previous argument in any way, so I'm not completely sure that you're saying "it's not a creation myth because it's not true." Is this really your argument? If it's not, I have no idea what you're trying to say here, unless you just got distracted halfway through the discussion and started talking about why you didn't like the War of the Sisters myth, rather than trying to explain why it wasn't, in fact, a creation myth "in the classical sense in respects to a pantheon."
No, I don't think its a creation myth per se, at least not in the sense that it explains how the gods came to be beyond Mystra. Apparently Chauntea just showed up at some point, so it doesn't even go into how she was formed in anything but the most abstract of ways. To me, its just the origin of a divine feud, not the origin of the world or the gods and creatures in it... those aren't really mentioned in anything but passing. So yeah, by the loosest criteria, it could qualify as a creation myth because it mentions the creation of the world, but at the same time, it doesn't do much to explain how that creation came to be, so in that sense, it isn't a creation myth, or at the least, not a very good one.
So it is difficult to use the real world as any sort of measurement. That means to me, the primary thing that makes a pantheon is where deities exist in a sphere of influence. Spheres of influence are often geographical in nature and based on similar culture, but that does not seem to be a requirement as it has been proven that deities can overlap and be in more than one pantheon at once.
So, to be considered part of a pantheon you must have a strong and active worshiper base in a sphere of influence, which is often geographical in nature. That is my definition and I believe it is accurate based on evidence shown to us in canon.
------
FRCS, pg. 260 titled, "Creation of the World":
"While mythology and religion rarely hold much sway for historians, certain legends are echoed in so many Faerûnian religions that they have become accepted as fact. Thus, the history of Faerûn began when Lord Ao created the universe that now holds the world of Toril."
It then goes on to literally talk about the War of Light and Darkness.
So yes, not only is it a creation myth, it also is acknowledged by most if not all Faerûnian religions.
I think that is enough evidence to establish:
1. The War of Light and Darkness is a creation myth.
2. That the Faerûnian Pantheon exists and is acknowledged as such by the people living in Faerûn.
3. That there are more legends and myths that the different religions share among each other, as the above said "legends," plural, instead of "legend," singular.
That's exactly how it is viewed. :P
In addition to the War of Light and Darkness, another popular creation myth deals with the World Serpent.
My point is this: the War of Light and Darkness is a creation myth SHARED by most if not all worshipers of deities who are part of the Faerûnian Pantheon. Hence, they are a pantheon based on geography and shared myth / culture.
That the people of Faerun accept it as true I don't dispute however. I'm just saying its more about a deific grudge match than it is about the creation of the Realms, and so isn't really a creation myth in anything but some details it mentions almost as an afterthought.
My point is this: the War of Light and Darkness is a creation myth SHARED by most if not all worshipers of deities who are part of the Faerûnian Pantheon. Hence, they are a pantheon based on geography and shared myth / culture.
EXCELLENT point.
And stigger, when it comes to gods and their myths, I prefer a little ambiguity, so that each of us can gather our own interpretations.
Since I've established that the Faerûnian Pantheon is an actual pantheon recognized by the people of Faerûn, it brings up certain issues. I tried to address those issues in previous posts.
Issue 1: It is clear that many of the deities of the Faerûnian Pantheon came from any number of different human pantheons. This means that there must have been a merge some time in the past.
My Solution: I believe that this merge began around the time most people consider the beginning of the Dawn Cataclysm. After the fall of the major human empires, human migration began to increase, especially from Netheril. As the humans moved they took their gods with them.
As individuals from different cultures and such began to convert to the immigrant deities, they began to share and establish common myths and legends surrounding the gods.
Lathander attempted to take advantage of this situation and instill himself as head of the emerging Pantheon. This receives the most focus, and what the time is remembered for... and of course, his failure.
Issue 2: If the gods are moving into new spheres of influence, how does this impact Ao's proclamation that only one deity above demigod may hold the same portfolio?
My Solution: The Dawn Cataclysm lasted for generations. It was not a single event, but a multitude of small and large events that took place over many years as a result of Ao's proclamation regarding portfolios. Deities left Toril, wars between multiple faiths broke out (it is likely that this is when the Tempus vs Targus / Garagos battle began), some deities died, others merged, while others split entirely.
Many of these things were later given myths and legends, but in reality played out among mortals. In other words, this was not like the Time of Troubles, gods did not do grand melee battles on Toril. It was entirely played out among the many different faiths. In the words of Highlander, "There can only be one."
During this time is also likely when many of the different cliques began to form.
Issue 3: If mortal worshipers can impact a deity in such a way, what are their limitations or abilities?
My Solution: Mortal worshipers play a direct role in the existence of gods. The gods can be altered by extreme and subtle changes in the faith over time, from changes of alignment, to the gaining and losing of portfolios. There are no hard and fast rules to this, as all is up for Ao to judge.
Issue 4: What types of things can happen to a deity? What types of things can they do?
My Solution: The deities can begin by creating an alias. In different cultures a deity may be known under a different name, and the churches may even be kept entirely separate. Under this new identity the deity is worshiped largely the same, although certain portfolios may be focused on more heavily than others, and rituals, legends and myths may differ to varying degrees.
Over time it is possible for an alias to drift so far from the original concept of a deity, that the deity itself risks undergoing a dramatic change. It is at this point that a deity could elect to forgo this and have his or her alias split off entirely, becoming an aspect.
An aspect is an entirely separate entity, which may or may not have ties to its creator. It is essentially for all intents and purposes a new deity, given life, shape and form by mortals and their worship, and birthed by another god. The formation of aspects is risky, as it has the potential to dramatically weaken the host deity. All worshipers shift from feeding the host deities power, to feeding and sustaining the aspects power.
Next, when faced with conflicting portfolios deities are essentially given three choices: leave Toril (either physically or through death), both deities with the shared portfolio merge, or one or both deities alter their portfolios to something less general (for example two sun deities may elect to modify their portfolios to dawn and highsun respectively).
Mortal worshipers play an integral role in this. Although in FR fiction we are often shown two deities physically battling it out, this is an anomaly and does not reflect what happens in the majority of cases.
When such conflicts occur, mortals are often the measuring stick used to determine the outcome, though the gods themselves have a large amount of say as well. For example, Tempus and Garagos are at war with one another over the war portfolio. A myth has been created to explain the rise of Tempus and the fall of Targus / Garagos. However, it is quite possible that a crusade broke out among the two deities worshipers which inevitably led to the victory of Tempus.
Such a war need not be fought with weapons, however, a war of conversion is also possible. Converting individuals from an opposing deity weakens the deity just the same as killing the potential converts, but has the added benefit of strengthening the converters chosen patron. However, it is difficult to imagine such things without at least some bloodshed.
But killing an opposing deity is not the only way to end such portfolio conflicts. Merging together is another. Individual deities can make this choice themselves, in which case it happens immediately, however it is also possible for a heresy to develop around the two deities. A good example of this type of heresy is the Dark Moon heresy which states that Selune and Shar are really two aspects of the same deity.
Over time such a heresy could become true, and then further down the line two separate aspects could eventually be molded into one... forgetting that there were ever two different parts.
Finally, there is the potential to alter portfolios slightly. The deities themselves, if they came to an agreement, could attempt to influence their worshipers to see them differently. However, in many cases such things begin as a heresy. In a sense, this would be a reverse of what happened to Lathander in his transformation to Amaunator. Instead of getting a more generalized portfolio, such as the sun, Amaunator would begin to be viewed as a dawn deity. Over time, various aspects of the dawn would be attributed to him, such as vitality, youth and renewal. However, the reverse is also possible, such as what did happen to Lathander, a broadening of his portfolio, and the loss of his more dawn related portfolios.
In the many ways I spoke of above mortal worshipers have the ability to influence their deities. I hope I've been clear how I came to those conclusions.
Issue 2: I'd ask what you meant by played out among their followers before characterizing my take on it. My own view is that society changed and adapted to the 'expanding' world, and altered the way it did things in light of those changes, abandoning obsolete and less useful ways of doing and thinking as their understanding improved... that certain deities were affected by this is inevitable as their worshipper base contracts or expands, such is the nature of progressive versus conservative/regressive elements. Sure the conservative/regressive elements will put up a struggle, but the weight of progress will inevitably overcome and overtake them. At best, they can delay the process, but they can't stop it when it comes down to it.
Issue 3: It depends on whether the deity is responsive to changes in society or not. If they are, then certainly they'll change to reflect new ways of thinking and doing, if only to keep their worshippers happy and to remain relevant to them... if not, well, they will inevitably be replaced by something more suitable that will show up. I don't think they can be forced to change though, unless they consciously choose to be, or they have it forced upon them by other divine beings.
The only thing I think mortals do is make them relevant or irrelevant as time goes on. Powerful stuff to be sure, but ultimately I'd say most of the changes were up to the deity, not the followers.
Issue 4: I think I pretty much covered my take on things above, but I'll use this space to illustrate why I think the Lathander/Amaunator transformation was just stupid. From all I've seen and read of the post Spellplague Realms, it ultimately experienced a massive regression in the form of an apocalyptic event... entering what would logically be a period akin to Earth's own medieval period, on a social and magical level. You have massive social upheaval as old lands and peoples disappear, and new and not-so-new ones come to replace them... presuming Lathander willingly chose to go with Amaunator, I'd see considerably more regressive factors at work than has been so far suggested. Going by what I've seen written of the 4e Realms, Lathander should be doing the "say it loud and say it proud" thing, not the hide your head in the sand thing that Amaunator represents, on a metaphysical level anyway. Certainly conservative/regressive elements would be powerful in a society looking for stability and certainty, but Lathanders transformation represents what is essentially the death knell of progressivism and advancement in the Realms as we know it. That's ultimately the part where the whole deal just collapses in on itself for me, because its just a complete non-sequiter for what we know of Lathander.
Understand I'm not trying to start a anti-4e rant here, I'm just saying that a lot of what we knew of the divine went straight out the window, and not just for mechanical reasons, with the advent of the Spellplague and its attendent events. Trying to make sense of it is something of a loosing proposition as best I can tell. Chalk it up to the chaos of the Spellplague and handwave it would be my best suggestion.
So do I generally, which is why that myth bothers me so much, considering it should be an apocryphal molehill, but its been magnified into a mountain with the whole Shadowcrap of Shar mess. Really, its got way too much importance and meaning stocked into it for what is probably an incorrect pile of steaming pooh.
I take it as mis-information and dogma spread by the church of Mystra to paint the 'Tyrant of magic' in a better light.
If you read some of my thoughts in the other threads (I'm weaving threads like I weave fluff), Shar may not be the monolithic evil she has been painted to be. If we apply her Entropy aspect, she could simply be wanting to return the universe to an earlier version of itself, which in her miind is not evil, but rather 'correct'.
The War of Light and Darkness is the Mystran version of just one battle that took place during the 'war of the Gods'. In fact, its easy to use all the holes in it to see right through Mystra's duplicity.
If she hated Selune, why is she hell-bent on destroying Mystra, her 'child'? I think whereas Selune embraced this new being's existance, Shar found it an affront to existance (playing on her Entropy aspect again). Shar abandons her fight with Selune in order to remove the 'abomination'. All evidence (now) points to Mystra interferring with Realmspace big-time, and maybe Shar realized Mystra was creating an imbalance and worked to be rid of her.
Also note that the Draconic creation-myth (from 2e's Draconimicon) also has a story about the first sun's destruction - an obvious running-theme, and we can deduce it is one of the few truths we can distill from the two.
As to why she's hell bent on destroying Mystra... I'd think it was obvious. If she truly is intent on destroying existence, she's going to need every shred of power she can get her hands on to do so. With a little piece of her running around in Mystra, she's got to get it back if she wants to have even the slimmest chance of accomplishing her goals. I can't say I've ever seen Shar as having abandoned her fight with Selune though... I don't see any justification for making that claim to be honest.
As to Mystra's interfering, I'd call it more insight into Shar's doings by having a piece of her within her divine make-up, and the interferring with Realmspace is likely her counteracting Shar's maneuverings and plans for unravelling existence.