Asmodeus is the guy who brings this up this time. His portfolio is “Sin”. In FRCS(3) sin is specified to be the act of not adhering to dogma when one is priest, paladin et.c. and this will interfere, in the long run, with his or her ability to cast spells. Other believers are likely to be judged by their deity upon arrival in its domain( this I deduce since certain evil souls are likely to choose a career in the Nine Hells rather than to go to their Deity’s domain). This judgment, I suppose, is made based on one’s adherence to dogma in general, as specified by each deity. If one managed to live in accordance to the dogma, one is rewarded, but failure to do so would result in a less fortunate afterlife. Now, then, “Sin”: who in Faerun is a sinner?
If a person is a bad believer who fails to live up to the dogma, he may reasonably be viewed as a sinner. Does this mean he is supporting Asmodeus? Will the Gods hand over poor believers to him after their death? Will, for exmple, a chauntean druid who hamsters provisions to further his own needs, be swayed to pray to Asmodeus all of a sudden? Who, in their right mind, would pay service to a god whose very idea is to be a bad follower? If you are a good follower to Asmodeus, would this require you to be a bad follower to him, and therefore abstain from sinning? How do you sin against the God of Sin? This is terribly confusing, in my opinion.
In a wider aspect, this raises questions about belief in general. It is obvious that it is fairly undesirable to be without a patron deity. If one is judged by said deity upon death, in accordance to dogma, it is best to choose a deity whose dogma is feasible. If you plan on conquering the world through a life of carnage and mayhem, Sune might not be a correct choice. But most of the evil deities aren’t exactly selling themselves: Shar would require one to never act out of hope or promise of success, never strive to better one’s lot in life or to plan ahead. It seems to me to be something of a miracle to get anyone but the really depressed to pay more than lip service. And say, Ghaunadaur, would really take severe dementia to be any surface-dwellers choice of primary deity. How can you explain the success of the evil deities?
How do you sin against the God of Sin?
That is exactly the question, why I do not like the idea, that Asmo became a god. If he would still be the normal corrupting devil, well then it is no problem, devils are liars they do not need dogmatics, they get the bad guys because they are bad. But if you are the god of Sin? Then whats a Sin to him, or is he now a forgiving patron to his own worshippers, because if they sin against him (in whatever way) they are only doing what he wanted to be done?
Besides, the only Sin against a devil or God of Devils I can imagine would be a worshiper of Asmo, who is in secret a follower of some demon(lord), that would be a really bad sin. But what became of such a soul?
-Now, take that last example, but apply it on a much broader, world-wide scale. Tormites consider certain things sins, things that Bane rewards his followers for doing. In the end, again, this is highly subjective, and depends on the faith of the individual, and what they do. For a Banite to perform an action that goes against the tenets of the Church of Bane would be a sin. For a Tormite to perform an action that goes against the tenets of the Church of Bane would not be a sin. For an atheist to perform an action that goes against the tenets of the Church of Bane would not be a sin.
-Again, shame on them for using the term 'sin'.
In FRCS(3) sin is specified to be the act of not adhering to dogma when one is priest, paladin et.c. and this will interfere, in the long run, with his or her ability to cast spells.
Chances are they meant Sin in a more biblical sense and didn't consider or chose not to worry about the FR3e definition.
If a person is a bad believer who fails to live up to the dogma, he may reasonably be viewed as a sinner. Does this mean he is supporting Asmodeus?
I doubt it. Asmodeus may or may not be quite the outright incarnation of tyrannical, corrupting evil that he was under the great wheel, but I still strongly doubt that his nature is so fluid as to allow him to draw power from absolutely anything as long as the patron god in question doesn't like it. If he himself is referred to as a god merely out of convenience and is in fact an anti-divinity akin to Kezef but on a more conceptual/behavioral level, it might make sense but even then it'd be pretty stupid: just imagine Asmodeus slyly tempting Talosians to tend gardens and Banites to champion liberty... I suppose if you really tried you could still make something like that seem nefarious, but why the hell bother when you could just ignore it in the first place?
Granted, Asmodeus is the sort of guy I can see using redemption as a means to further his ultimately fiendish ends, but to say that he directly benefits from lapses and defections from evil dogmas by default is pushing it and frankly cheapens events that would otherwise serve as testaments to his far-seeing guile.
Will the Gods hand over poor believers to him after their death?
No reason his portfolio should make that the case, really: for example, Shar can't claim those who live and die in despair, Cyric has no monopoly on the souls of liars, betrayers, and murderers, Bane has no say over the fate of a tyrant's soul, etc. etc., unless they choose to devote themselves to one of the aforementioned gods. Besides, those who die in conflict with/betrayal of their deities principles are designated False and judged by Kelemvor, so there doesn't seem to be much room for Asmodeus to enter into the picture there.
Will, for exmple, a chauntean druid who hamsters provisions to further his own needs, be swayed to pray to Asmodeus all of a sudden?
Furthering a deity's portfolio isn't necessarily the same as developing a compulsion, sudden or otherwise, to honor and serve that deity. The crooked druid might, if he is aware of Asmodeus, be inclined to appeal to him if the behavior is characteristic of the druid in general since he could probably expect some kind of reward or approval for violating Chauntea's edicts, but that'd still be his choice to make, more or less. On the other hand, he might be in denial or have a distorted view of Chauntea's dogma and see no need to seek another deity's support, or he might turn to a deity other than Asmodeus even if he considers it necessary/desirable to find alternative divine sponsorship.
Who, in their right mind, would pay service to a god whose very idea is to be a bad follower?
If he embodies sin in the sense of the seven deadlies and other forms of destructive excess/moral failing, I can see mortals turning to him to escape the judgment of other deities or being drawn to him as a force that sanctions, even celebrates, their despicable urges and ambitions, though, again, not necessarily to a greater extent than they would be drawn to other gods who would find their behavior acceptable.
If he embodies sin in the sense of anything that is condemned by the dogma of a patron deity, it gets pretty wacky. On one hand, a face value assessment could argued to suggest that followers of Asmodeus are charged with violating even the tenets of his faith like you said, and it would in turn suggest that his prospective followers were largely motivated by disagreement with or outright loathing for Asmodeus if they're going to make it their holy mission to defy his edicts. On the other hand, a more reasonable interpretation would be that Asmodeus a) has an agenda beyond getting people to **** off their patron deities just because, and b) has and enforces certain standards that are favorable to that agenda.
But most of the evil deities aren’t exactly selling themselves: Shar would require one to never act out of hope or promise of success, never strive to better one’s lot in life or to plan ahead. It seems to me to be something of a miracle to get anyone but the really depressed to pay more than lip service. And say, Ghaunadaur, would really take severe dementia to be any surface-dwellers choice of primary deity.
People often pray to Shar for relief from the pain of loss (via her portfolio of Forgetfulness), to keep their schemes hidden, to inflict the pain of loss upon others, and so forth. In most cases Sharrans and Shar herself likely require no more than lip service and cooperation out of self-interest: they're a secretive lot who prefer to act through dupes and pawns, after all, and so much the better if these dupes and pawns have little value as prospective members of the faith when they inevitably sacrifice or discard them. As for the process of obtaining sincere converts, as you've noted the true dogma of Shar is far from seductive, but then again, Sharrans aren't likely to disclose it in that form to begin with. On the contrary, for the purposes of attracting new members, selective interpretations, half-truths, and even outright lies about the goddess, her dogma, and her goals are likely to be the norm; as the indoctrination progresses, converts may be exposed to deeper secrets of the faith, but only after they have proven themselves and thus become more firmly bound to the church.
You can be damned sure that the more a Sharran knows, the less able they are to leave it all behind even if they wanted to, and the Sharrans above them have a vested interest in making sure that they don't want to leave. Aside from antagonistic methods like extortion, intimidation, and so forth, Sharrans are likely to employ softer sells like seduction, acceptance, false sympathy, and ill counsel. Sharran cells undoubtedly cultivate grossly warped views of the world and other religions, feelings of belonging and dependence via social dynamics within the cult, a sense of entrapment through the crimes they commit in the service of Shar, and so on. I wouldn't put it past them by any means to control recruits through narcotics and addiction; the long term goal would ultimately be to foster earnest faith in Shar and devotion to her cause, but that isn't necessarily incompatible with whatever underhanded methods they choose to employ along the way.
As for Ghaunadaur, he's kind of an easy target. He's basically intended as a god for monsters, fringe loonies, and drow who don't really have much of a better choice in Lolth as far as crazy, abusive dogmas go. Even so, it's not all that hard to imagine a sect of Ghaunadaurins (or whatever the hell they're called) evangelizing their god as a font of carnal mysticism, a master of the secrets of growth and transformation, and a source of unbounded liberty to those who accept his wisdom. After all, he doesn't ask much beyond the sacrifice of sentients and defilement of rival churches... there is that unpleasant bit about offering yourself up in sacrifice in the end, but disclosure of that can certainly wait. As with Shar, the church of Ghaunadaur would rest upon a fanatic core that spins or withholds facts about the faith as necessary to bring in new blood: after that it's not all that hard to corner them and pull the same tricks in the hopes the less savory demands of the church are imposed on someone other than them.
Compared to those two, gods like Bane, Cyric, Mask, Loviatar, and so on don't even have to work that hard. They don't demand that their followers forsake all hope or offer themselves up as sacrifices (although it's another story if their peers decide to put them on the chopping block), so they don't even have to gloss over that. They just have to find people who are or can be influenced to become amenable to the various actions they promote, and that's not as a hard as a person might like to think.
Chances are they meant Sin in a more biblical sense and didn't consider or chose not to worry about the FR3e definition.
I would hope not. The Realms is not a setting with a Biblical worldview.
I would hope not. The Realms is not a setting with a Biblical worldview.
-If riding on a dinosaur is good enough for Ubtao, why not Jesus?! :P
-If riding on a dinosaur is good enough for Ubtao, why not Jesus?! :P
Oh god, I've heard of that meme.
I would hope not. The Realms is not a setting with a Biblical worldview.
I tend to agree, and honestly think it's a fairly stupid portfolio however they meant it given the degree to which sins by biblical perspectives are already represented by existing portfolios for emotions and actions, but I also think you're probably hoping for too much. At the very least, I think it was more likely to be meant in that way than 'an act in violation of this or that god's particular dogma'.
I tend to agree, and honestly think it's a fairly stupid portfolio however they meant it given the degree to which sins by biblical perspectives are already represented by existing portfolios for emotions and actions, but I also think you're probably hoping for too much.
Well, the first thing that comes to my mind is "lust"--that is something that isn't seen as "sinful" in the Realms, and the gods that are most associated with are in fact good. That's what I was thinking of when I mentioned Biblical perspectives being out of place in the Realms.
-Don't get me started on the "sexual liberation" of the Forgotten Realms! I swear...! If one more person says that (and I paraphrase), "It's alright to cheat on your spouses. They don't mind. It doesn't hurt them in the least!"...That's bologna.
Well, I wasn't saying that.
I admit, I'm not a fan of interspersing figures from the world religions in Realmslore (or game lore in general). As a practicing Catholic, there's basically a snowball's chance in hell I'm going to use an actual demon's name for a fantasy character. I think the designers would have been better off naming their fictional character something novel instead of dipping their toes into real-world theology.
Granted, this particular creature's been around since first edition. With apologies to Ed, I don't think that's a good thing.
Asmodeus is, obviously, patterned after the demon mentioned in the Book of Tobit (either a canonical or deuterocanonical book, depending upon Christian denomination). The "Sin" reference is obviously a reference to this.
I admit, I'm not a fan of interspersing figures from the world religions in Realmslore (or game lore in general). As a practicing Catholic, there's basically a snowball's chance in hell I'm going to use an actual demon's name for a fantasy character. I think the designers would have been better off naming their fictional character something novel instead of dipping their toes into real-world theology.
Granted, this particular creature's been around since first edition. With apologies to Ed, I don't think that's a good thing.
I think Ed doesn´t have all that much to do with that demon lord, I guess it was Garys invention from a time when they bought plastic miniatures from asia and decided that the weird one was a rust monster ....:D
And actually one of my players chose the name "Samael" for his character - he didn´t know the backround, and doesn´t got to church - but still kinda nice to know what the name refers to.
-If riding on a dinosaur is good enough for Ubtao, why not Jesus?! :P
It could happen, so sayeth the internet!
I am truly ashamed to be a christian now, but that article was hilarious! 
It could happen, so sayeth the internet!
-Ohhhhh boooyyy...
-Well, that's another matter entirely...
