From what I understand is that it is a big wall in Kelemvors realm where all the nonbelievers go to become the wall. However, all this I learned from the internet and I can't find a source in the 4th or 3.5th edition books.
So, the question is: 'Does the Wall of the Faithless actually exist or is it fanfiction?'
And furthermore, what does the Wall keep in/out?
I personally think it's a stupid idea, but if you and yours like it, enjoy.
Not sure how reliable the source is, but here's a wiki article I found on it: nwn2.wikia.com/wiki/Wall_of_the_Faithles... It seems the wall exists/existed for no other purpose than to screw people over.
And the general rule of 4e Realms is if they dont specifically say that something is gone then we are to assume that its still there, so Id say that the wall is still there in the 4e timeline.
That said, I agree that the Wall has been a stupid idea ever since they put it in, but the Realms is stuck with it until they say it's gone.
The 3.5 Players Guide to Faerûn has details about the Fugue Plane and the wall on p. 153.
Karen Wynn Fonstad's Forgotten Realms Atlas has some details and a cool map of the City of Judgment, including the wall.
I think its a great idea, and there should be some kinda consequnece for not being faithful,
Why?
I think its a great idea, and there should be some kinda consequnece for not being faithful,
Why?
Cause then people would just say screw the gods who needs them, and the gods cant have that. That and it also seems to be part of most religions, the faithful are rewarded in the afterlife, the unfaithful, not so much.
Even without it, I would think one's actions, rather than one's words, would be more important. If person A acts in accordance with (say) Torm's portfolio, but doesn't worship anybody, but person B claims to worship Torm but doesn't act in accordance with that, why should B get the reward? You shouldn't get rewarded or punished just because you decide not to brownnose.
Some minimal amount of real worship is required to initiate a patron relationship with a god. Without a patron, no god can claim you, so you are stuck in the Fugue. The servitors of any god who is not your patron cannot even see you, speak to you or interact with you in anyway. After a time, if no god comes to collect you, you feel the siren tug of Kelemvor's city calling to you to come for judgment.
The faithless begin to petrify and are tossed onto the wall. There is a moss that acts like a mortar that is corrosive and breaks down the substance of the petitioner body. Eventually the petitioner body is eaten away.
It is speculated that the soulstuff in the petitioner body would then be released and could travel back to the Bastion of Unborn Souls to be reborn and try again. Others think that the energy goes to sustain the Fugue Plane.
Those who have spurned their god, betrayed her, or pretended to follow the edicts of the faith while actually practicing acts that are antithetical to the god's teachings are also called to Kelemvor's city for judgment. Kelemvor is required to judge the False and condemn them to appropriate punishment which can run the gamut from light, administrative or janitorial duty in the city to extreme tortures that would shock a demon lord.
Some view the Wall as a punishment. It is not. As fates go, it is relatively neutral. Far worse fates are meted out to the faithful of some evil gods. Some gods torture, abuse, or even eat their petitioners. As things go, the Wall is not that bad.
I have theorized that the petrification isn't necessarily even part of Kelemvor's judgment. It may just be a natural function of the petitioner body to run out of steam and freeze up as if their battery had run down without the divine energy of a patron god or afterlife plane to recharge and sustain it. It might be that the Fugue would be littered with statues without Kelemvor to toss them up on the Wall. The Wall may just be the best place to stack them so they don't clutter up the place. At least on the Wall, the petitioner may have the opportunity to get broken down and released. Without the Wall, the petitioner might be stuck frozen and aware for all eternity. By that reasoning, Kelemvor may be doing them a favor by placing them on the Wall. It is a mercy.
Now in life, actions don't really count so much as faith. In the Realms, the system is rigged in favor of the gods. It's not like people can be agnostic or atheist. People know that gods are real. There is no question that they do exist. People have free will to choose or not choose to worship. But when they die, in order to leave the Fugue they have to have established a patron relationship. I am pretty sure they can even get a grace period after death to choose a patron before they feel the siren call of the city of judgment. But if they don't they will be called and judged.
One can argue it is not fair. But is it really? No god is obligated to offer a person divine succor without the soul paying the price of worship. The soul has fair warning and opportunity to choose a patron deity. If not, then that person is really choosing the Wall by default. And who are we to argue with them if that is their choice? Seems fair to me.
Can't see that as a bad thing, myself.
Even without it, I would think one's actions, rather than one's words, would be more important. If person A acts in accordance with (say) Torm's portfolio, but doesn't worship anybody, but person B claims to worship Torm but doesn't act in accordance with that, why should B get the reward? You shouldn't get rewarded or punished just because you decide not to brownnose.
I don't really know what you mean by acting "in accordance with (say) Torm's portfolio, but doesn't worship anybody". If you're really acting out the precepts of Torm's faith, for example, you're essentially worshipping him, regardless of what term you use for it. But I think you may be bringing a dose too much of the real world with you in thinking about this. [And, as Gray points out, in your example, Person B, the hypocrite, isn't going to get his reward.]
Why wouldn't you go all the way and worship Torm? As Gray points out above, this isn't an open question — in the Realms the gods are very real. There's no room for the agnostic or the atheist — you can refuse to worship the gods, but it's impossible to deny that they're real. You're not "brownnosing", you're accepting reality as it exists in the Realms.
Moreover, it should be noted that we're talking about a patron deity here, not just the gods. Everyone worships all the gods, in essence — it's a truly polytheistic society. If a sailor who's generally a good guy is about to head out for a journey, he's going to make an offering to Umberlee, even if he's not a "worshipper." If there's a storm on the horizon, he may send a prayer to Talos to keep it away. He may make annual sacrifices to Istishia, just because he deals with water on a regular basis. And yet his patron may be Gwaeron, or anyone else.
None of those actions affects his relationship with his patron, or his alignment. In the Realms, you may have a "special relationship" with your patron, but all of the deities exist, not just for you, but for everyone. The classic Cartesian argument with regard to the existence of God has already been answered, for everyone, with fact.
Someone put in the Wall cannot be ressurected.
Note that demons and devils don't have gods to attract petitioners. But they need petitioners to replenish and grow their ranks (to make new lemures and manes from). So the demons have to resort to theft and the devils have to resort to bargaining. That's in addition to the souls they can convert during their lifetimes, which is one reason the devils and demons are always trying to get mortals to sign contracts and make pacts.
Furthermore, Asmodeus can have legitimate clergies now. I have a hard time imagining devil cults openly reforming into an organised religion in or near Fearuns cities though. And a church based on sin would basicly be an enemy of all other religions. I'd rather like for a designer article explaining the situation.
However, making evil fun is probably how Azzy could best attract new recruits.
And Silversword, you... of all people... are going to talk about a topic moving away from the original post...?
;)
Nah, seriously I understand that the OP didn't ask for opinions but it's obviously a controversial enough idea that it's going to evoke reactions. I hope the OP does not think I'm maligning him personally for wanting to use it; there's obviously enough people out there who do and like it, like yourself. I also do not intend to demean you either, my friend.
It's just that I personally don't see why mortals should suffer for eternity for not worshipping gods acting as poorly as they often do in the Forgotten Realms divine soap operas. A lot of this is leftover rancour on my part from the Time of Troubles. Again, it wasn't a part of the Realms that I had back in the Old Grey Box - and that's where a lot of my pre-4e canon ends.
We dont need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the classroom
Teachers leave them kids alone
Hey! Teachers! Leave them kids alone!
All in all it's just another brick in the wall.
All in all you're just another brick in the wall.
We don't need no education
We dont need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the classroom
Teachers leave them kids alone
Hey! Teachers! Leave them kids alone!
All in all it's just another brick in the wall.
All in all you're just another brick in the wall.
"Wrong, Do it again!"
"If you don't eat yer meat, you can't have any pudding. How can you
have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat?"
"You! Yes, you behind the bikesheds, stand still laddy!"
I think any form of eternal punishment is stupid for the mistakes of a lifetime that last on average...50 years?
And Silversword, you... of all people... are going to talk about a topic moving away from the original post...?
;)
Nah, seriously I understand that the OP didn't ask for opinions but it's obviously a controversial enough idea that it's going to evoke reactions. I hope the OP does not think I'm maligning him personally for wanting to use it; there's obviously enough people out there who do and like it, like yourself. I also do not intend to demean you either, my friend.
It's just that I personally don't see why mortals should suffer for eternity for not worshipping gods acting as poorly as they often do in the Forgotten Realms divine soap operas. A lot of this is leftover rancour on my part from the Time of Troubles. Again, it wasn't a part of the Realms that I had back in the Old Grey Box - and that's where a lot of my pre-4e canon ends.
What do you mean? I always stay on topic? OK yeah I couldnt say that with a straight face. Yeah everybodys got opinions and this is a forum where we can express those opinions, its just kinda funny cause I was just talking about this thread and the Realms forum in general about how alot of people seem so negative and they get on there and say oh thats stupid, and then you got on there and said thats stupid HAHA! I mean nothing wrong with that. But I dunno I dont think youd get eternal punishment for something minor like oh no I forgot to turn in the libary books, I think youd have to screw up real bad, I think reincarnation fits in there too, you keep goin on until you do good and make it to the other side or higher plane or whatever or you mess up real bad, then its the wall for you, but even then whos to say? What if you find redemption in the Wall? Werent there a few that made it out?
And I finally get Delta's Another Brick In The Wall reference.
To bad the gods don't go to the wall?
Whats so stupid about it? I think its more orginal than say burning in hell for all eternity, and some of the gods are worthy of worship, take Cyric for example, hes all the time helpin out his followers, they want power, he gives it to them, of course its ussally more power than they can handle and it burns out their mortal shell, but still they got what they asked for! And any way the OP didnt really ask what our opinions of the wall was, basically they wanted to know if it existed canonically in 4e Realms, the answer is yes, so I dont really understand why we need to get on here and say oh its stupid, or oh I think its cool, personally I like it, and as a DM i can use it as salt in the wounds, not only did your character die, but he or she ended up in the wall HAHAHA! Just my opinion, people are entilted to their own opinions obviosly, theres nothing forcing you to use it, really I dont see it coming into play any way, unless you want to run an Underworld type campaign were the characters are already dead.
It's stupid because the punishment of the Wall (and it is punishment, not "neutral") is really only for the Faithless, not the False. Those who betray their deity's core dogma, the False, are judged directly by Kelemvor and punished by becoming civil servants in the afterlife. They wander the city of the dead as slaves for Kelemvor if their transgression wasn't too horrible, or they might be "punished worse in ways that would surprise a demon lord" (and yeah, I can't remember the exact quote, but that's what they get - for eternity). Still, being enslaved as a civil servant, even if tortured every so often or traded to another deity or demonlord so you serve them, is better than the Wall because it's not a constant slow torture with no hope of upward mobility for "good behavior" so to speak.
The Faithless, those who only provide lipservice or those who choose not to worship a particular deity, get put into the Wall so that they are slowly paralyzed and eaten by wall-goop until nothing of their soul remains. Far from "neutral" this is like slowly being dissolved in acid over decades, eons, or millenia, depending on how strong your soul might be. Arriving in the Fugue plane and seeing the Wall, then never getting a "call" from any of the deities (even though you may have lived a fully good and caring life), devils are allowed by contract to come up and offer you an unknown future in the Hells vs. the obvious and lingering torture you can see in the Wall.
Who might be punished for eternity in the Wall as a Faithless?
- a goodly commoner of the Realms who might be truly polytheist and select no patron but whispers a prayer to all of the gods at different times (i.e. lipservice, but to all the gods).
- a good man who might acknowledge the gods' existence but feels that they are merely magically-empowered mortals unworthy of worship (which is arguably true, and many commoners alive would know the truth of recent mortal ascensions).
- a man who is lawful and good his entire life, but believes in Ao as an overdeity (which is true, but will get him nothing in the afterlife but a ticket to the Wall).
- a woman who worshipped a specific deity all her life, but that deity dies a few years before her own death (no deity exists now to claim her sorry soul, because she didn't worship any other, too bad!).
The Wall is written as a mechanism to induce worship through fear, condoned by all the gods by contract; its existence means that even the most noble and good god is really just interested in souls for their ultimate utilitarian purposes. It means that truthfully, even though Amaunator and Corellon and Selune might say certain noble things about morality and living a good life, even they just want worship-sustenance and fodder to service their base needs. Because really, 60-some years of worship on Faerun is peanuts to eternal worship and service in the afterlife. The Wall means that there is no real or functional difference between a good god and an evil one in the final equation, because they all want your soul for use as a battery and so they can order you around.
Furthermore, the Wall offers no possibility of redemption, and actually encourages "faithless" souls to take the offers of devils (or demons, if they sneak through). It's a fate that should be seen as unjust to anyone with a moral code, really. The False actually have it better, even though they may have worshipped someone like Lathander and then turned on their deity by promoting an evil heresy against Him, because that False Lathanderite is punished by forced service and enslavement (not being eaten away slowly over eons or millenia).
And really, it's probably not all that effective a means of encouraging worship because most commoner mortals may never even hear of its existence in their lifetimes. If you lived a good and moral life but didn't ever select a specific patron deity, it's rather like being punished for eternity for "fine print" in a contract that no priest ever bothered to show and explain to you.
It's stupid because the punishment of the Wall (and it is punishment, not "neutral") is really only for the Faithless, not the False. Those who betray their deity's core dogma, the False, are judged directly by Kelemvor and punished by becoming civil servants in the afterlife. They wander the city of the dead as slaves for Kelemvor if their transgression wasn't too horrible, or they might be "punished worse in ways that would surprise a demon lord" (and yeah, I can't remember the exact quote, but that's what they get - for eternity). Still, being enslaved as a civil servant, even if tortured every so often or traded to another deity or demonlord so you serve them, is better than the Wall because it's not a constant slow torture with no hope of upward mobility for "good behavior" so to speak.
The Faithless, those who only provide lipservice or those who choose not to worship a particular deity, get put into the Wall so that they are slowly paralyzed and eaten by wall-goop until nothing of their soul remains. Far from "neutral" this is like slowly being dissolved in acid over decades, eons, or millenia, depending on how strong your soul might be. Arriving in the Fugue plane and seeing the Wall, then never getting a "call" from any of the deities (even though you may have lived a fully good and caring life), devils are allowed by contract to come up and offer you an unknown future in the Hells vs. the obvious and lingering torture you can see in the Wall.
Who might be punished for eternity in the Wall as a Faithless?
- a goodly commoner of the Realms who might be truly polytheist and select no patron but whispers a prayer to all of the gods at different times (i.e. lipservice, but to all the gods).
- a good man who might acknowledge the gods' existence but feels that they are merely magically-empowered mortals unworthy of worship (which is arguably true, and many commoners alive would know the truth of recent mortal ascensions).
- a man who is lawful and good his entire life, but believes in Ao as an overdeity (which is true, but will get him nothing in the afterlife but a ticket to the Wall).
- a woman who worshipped a specific deity all her life, but that deity dies a few years before her own death (no deity exists now to claim her sorry soul, because she didn't worship any other, too bad!).
The Wall is written as a mechanism to induce worship through fear, condoned by all the gods by contract; its existence means that even the most noble and good god is really just interested in souls for their ultimate utilitarian purposes. It means that truthfully, even though Amaunator and Corellon and Selune might say certain noble things about morality and living a good life, even they just want worship-sustenance and fodder to service their base needs. Because really, 60-some years of worship on Faerun is peanuts to eternal worship and service in the afterlife. The Wall means that there is no real or functional difference between a good god and an evil one in the final equation, because they all want your soul for use as a battery and so they can order you around.
Furthermore, the Wall offers no possibility of redemption, and actually encourages "faithless" souls to take the offers of devils (or demons, if they sneak through). It's a fate that should be seen as unjust to anyone with a moral code, really. The False actually have it better, even though they may have worshipped someone like Lathander and then turned on their deity by promoting an evil heresy against Him, because that False Lathanderite is punished by forced service and enslavement (not being eaten away slowly over eons or millenia).
And really, it's probably not all that effective a means of encouraging worship because most commoner mortals may never even hear of its existence in their lifetimes. If you lived a good and moral life but didn't ever select a specific patron deity, it's rather like being punished for eternity for "fine print" in a contract that no priest ever bothered to show and explain to you.
Well said, Jorunhast. Thank you.
And thank you, Delta, for that wonderful image - now THAT I wouldn't mind to see!
It's stupid because the punishment of the Wall (and it is punishment, not "neutral") is really only for the Faithless, not the False.
There you go again, characterizing some aspect of the Realms as "stupid." I truly don't understand your contempt for the Realms and its designers and authors. I would point out that your explanation for your characterization of the Wall as "stupid" is not an example of stupidity, but rather an example of inequity. Your objection should be that the Wall is inequitable--not stupid.
Second, I don't think you have proved your argument that the Wall is a punishment. It is a fate, but there is no active punishing going on. You have not shown that the petitioners in the wall would be animate regardless of their being stacked on the wall. Without a divine spark provided by a deity or an afterlife, there is no evidence to show that the petitioner bodies don't just run out of juice and petrify on their own. Kelemvor is in charge of keeping an orderly Fugue Plane. He doesn't need to have a bunch of statues blocking the streets and cluttering up the planes. Seems perfectly reasonable to use the materials at hand to make a defensive ring around the City of Judgment to protect it from demons. After all, the petrified petitioners aren't doing anything else.
Thirdly, I don't think everyone would agree that the Wall is torture, or even unpleasant. I am not aware of any source that says this process is painful. While I guess it can't be ruled out, I am not aware of a source that says it, and I don't think you should assume it. The breaking down process may be painless, or relatively so. Many probably find the opportunity to peacefully reflect on things as pleasant and a nice end to their existence. Doubtless some find it boring. Maybe some consider it a torture. But I don't think you have shown that a majority of petitioners consider it such, or even a large minority.
Fourthly, the Wall is not a permanent fate. The mold in the mortar of the Wall breaks down the petitioner body until at some point it fades away. While what happens after that (is the soul reincarnated? Absorbed into the plane?) remains unknown, the petitioner's time in the Wall is temporary. Arguably, if the petitioner were allowed to petrify and stand around on the Fugue Plane for eternity without the benefit of the Wall breaking him down, that might be a truly horrible, maddening fate. I reiterate that Kelemvor placing someone on the Wall strikes me as a mercy, not a punishment.
Still, being enslaved as a civil servant, even if tortured every so often or traded to another deity or demonlord so you serve them, is better than the Wall because it's not a constant slow torture with no hope of upward mobility for "good behavior" so to speak.
That may be your personal preference. I'm not sure everyone would agree with you on that. I think I would prefer to be on the Wall than be tortured with the vague hope of eventual promotion. But to each his own.
You mention several types of "good" people who might get condemned to the Wall, and I say yes that's all true. But to me that strikes me as an incredibly naive notion that people should be rewarded despite not having followed the rules. At least there are some rules in the Realms. The Wall is a fact of nature in the Realms. It is physics. It is their reality.
Would you say that the concept of tigers is stupid because they kill and eat poor defenseless, morally upright animals that were just trying to care for their young? Do you think cars are stupid because thousands of good people die in car wrecks every year? What about floods? Hurricanes? Mudslides? It just seems silly to me to argue that the Wall is stupid because it is somehow unfair. While I think it actually is plenty fair, the idea that it has to be fair strikes me as wrongheaded and out of whack with all the other facts of nature that have nothing to do with fairness. You can't argue with a fact of nature. It is what it is.
The Wall is written as a mechanism to induce worship through fear, condoned by all the gods by contract; its existence means that even the most noble and good god is really just interested in souls for their ultimate utilitarian purposes.
I don't know that the gods condone it. Perhaps they do. But look at it the other way round. What right does anyone have to expect an afterlife after they die? Once you die, anything further is just gravy. If you know the score all your life that gods are real and you have to do some minimal amount of worship to one in order to go to an afterlife, then it strikes me as the height of hubris to demand you be given some lovely reward for which you were entirely unwilling to pay the price. An afterlife is not an entitlement. The gods are right not to reward anyone with an afterlife who will not pay them worship. Even if they wanted to, out of charity, the metaphysical laws of the Realms won't allow it. Maybe Ao decreed it, maybe the gods established it by compact, or maybe it is just a physical law of nature. But only if you have worshiped a god in life does that god have any power to grant you an afterlife. If you worship no god, then none can help you. Just the way it is. But that actually sounds fair to me.
Furthermore, the Wall offers no possibility of redemption.
Well, firstly, the time for redemption is during your lifetime. You even get a grace period. You can bargain with the devils. Or presumably you can select a patron even after your death, up until the moment that Kelemvor at your judgment asks you "have you chosen a patron?" The Wall is only a last resort for people who have chosen no other fate. In the words of the famous Getty Lee: "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!" And who are we to not honor that choice? Seems awfully patronistic to say that one can solemnly make that choice, standing before Kelemvor, knowing full well what it means for all time. And then, after throwing them up on the wall, saying: "okay, we were just kidding, you can take it back." There are no take-backsies after death.
But secondly, again, it's not permanent! There is a great unknown for that soul after it is disolved by the mortar in the Wall. If it is true that the soul returns to the Bastion of Unborn Souls to be born again, then there is your chance at redemption right there. He's got a chance.
So in conclusion: Not a punishment. Not really all that bad, all things considered. Not unfair. And then again, who said (after)life was fair? It is what it is.
Whats so stupid about it? I think its more orginal than say burning in hell for all eternity, and some of the gods are worthy of worship, take Cyric for example, hes all the time helpin out his followers, they want power, he gives it to them, of course its ussally more power than they can handle and it burns out their mortal shell, but still they got what they asked for! And any way the OP didnt really ask what our opinions of the wall was, basically they wanted to know if it existed canonically in 4e Realms, the answer is yes, so I dont really understand why we need to get on here and say oh its stupid, or oh I think its cool, personally I like it, and as a DM i can use it as salt in the wounds, not only did your character die, but he or she ended up in the wall HAHAHA! Just my opinion, people are entilted to their own opinions obviosly, theres nothing forcing you to use it, really I dont see it coming into play any way, unless you want to run an Underworld type campaign were the characters are already dead.
It's stupid because the punishment of the Wall (and it is punishment, not "neutral") is really only for the Faithless, not the False. Those who betray their deity's core dogma, the False, are judged directly by Kelemvor and punished by becoming civil servants in the afterlife. They wander the city of the dead as slaves for Kelemvor if their transgression wasn't too horrible, or they might be "punished worse in ways that would surprise a demon lord" (and yeah, I can't remember the exact quote, but that's what they get - for eternity). Still, being enslaved as a civil servant, even if tortured every so often or traded to another deity or demonlord so you serve them, is better than the Wall because it's not a constant slow torture with no hope of upward mobility for "good behavior" so to speak.
The Faithless, those who only provide lipservice or those who choose not to worship a particular deity, get put into the Wall so that they are slowly paralyzed and eaten by wall-goop until nothing of their soul remains. Far from "neutral" this is like slowly being dissolved in acid over decades, eons, or millenia, depending on how strong your soul might be. Arriving in the Fugue plane and seeing the Wall, then never getting a "call" from any of the deities (even though you may have lived a fully good and caring life), devils are allowed by contract to come up and offer you an unknown future in the Hells vs. the obvious and lingering torture you can see in the Wall.
Who might be punished for eternity in the Wall as a Faithless?
- a goodly commoner of the Realms who might be truly polytheist and select no patron but whispers a prayer to all of the gods at different times (i.e. lipservice, but to all the gods).
- a good man who might acknowledge the gods' existence but feels that they are merely magically-empowered mortals unworthy of worship (which is arguably true, and many commoners alive would know the truth of recent mortal ascensions).
- a man who is lawful and good his entire life, but believes in Ao as an overdeity (which is true, but will get him nothing in the afterlife but a ticket to the Wall).
- a woman who worshipped a specific deity all her life, but that deity dies a few years before her own death (no deity exists now to claim her sorry soul, because she didn't worship any other, too bad!).
The Wall is written as a mechanism to induce worship through fear, condoned by all the gods by contract; its existence means that even the most noble and good god is really just interested in souls for their ultimate utilitarian purposes. It means that truthfully, even though Amaunator and Corellon and Selune might say certain noble things about morality and living a good life, even they just want worship-sustenance and fodder to service their base needs. Because really, 60-some years of worship on Faerun is peanuts to eternal worship and service in the afterlife. The Wall means that there is no real or functional difference between a good god and an evil one in the final equation, because they all want your soul for use as a battery and so they can order you around.
Furthermore, the Wall offers no possibility of redemption, and actually encourages "faithless" souls to take the offers of devils (or demons, if they sneak through). It's a fate that should be seen as unjust to anyone with a moral code, really. The False actually have it better, even though they may have worshipped someone like Lathander and then turned on their deity by promoting an evil heresy against Him, because that False Lathanderite is punished by forced service and enslavement (not being eaten away slowly over eons or millenia).
And really, it's probably not all that effective a means of encouraging worship because most commoner mortals may never even hear of its existence in their lifetimes. If you lived a good and moral life but didn't ever select a specific patron deity, it's rather like being punished for eternity for "fine print" in a contract that no priest ever bothered to show and explain to you.
Theres False in the Wall as well, its not just for the Faithless, this is the Realms were talkin about here, the god are very real, everybody knows theyre real, so theres not going to be any one who doesnt believe in the gods, everybodys got faith to some degree. From the novels ive read, the ones who ended up in the Wall are the False, those who said they worshipped diety x but in reality didnt live by that gods teachings, so I dont think a goodly commoner who prayers to various gods would end up in the Wall, ONe of the gods would pick them up or Kemlemvor would take them in. Now Cyric, Mykrul, and Jergal probably threw anyone into the Wall, but Kelemvor only puts those in there who are deserving of it, in fact Kelemvor rejudged all the souls in the wall, some were put back but not all of them, So those that are there deserve to be there, according to Kelemvors judgememt any way, hes got a magic mirror to help him out, so I trust his judgement.
But of course theres no clear cut rules that say who goes in the Wall and who doesnt, so Its really up to the DM to decide, but as I said before, its not really going to come into play, Most DMs ive played with are just like youre dead, and thats it, but if you wanted to roleplay the afterlife, I guess you could, that might be kinda fun.
Anyway, that player had to drop out of the game after a time. So I had the party get kidnapped by a cult of Cyric cell in Everlund. They were all chained up in a dungeon, and the guards came and dragged Victor, the half-orc, away. The rogue managed to pick their locks and free them, so when the guards came next to drag one of them off, they overpowered the guards and escaped. Then they had to challenge the leader, a necromancer, in his sanctuary where he was huddled over an altar working on something. As they engaged the necromancer, he stepped back and commanded the subject on the altar to rise, and it was their friend, Victor, now a zombie. The reveal was very powerful and the players were very surprised.
The party fought and killed the necromancer (for the first time, he kept coming back periodically, the mark of a good nemesis). They had avenged their friend but they were low level at that point and sadly didn't have the money to raise him.
Many sessions later, one of the other characters happened to die. He ended up in the Fugue and discovered the wall. As he was exploring it he saw a familiar face. It was Victor! The players were totally surprised. Dominic had an interesting conversation with Victor and I used that encounter to reveal some prophetic tidbits and plot points before Dominic got resurrected. That was a really great session. And I was pleased because I got to use the Wall in a game.
You fail to prove that the wall isn't torture. And also arrogantly assume that because you don't have a problem with something, that nobody else should, either. Well, I'll arrogantly assume right back that since I do have a problem with it, everybody else should, too.
Also, isn't the Bastion of Unborn Souls part of that Incarnum crap that's not even canon for the Realms anyway?
There you go again, characterizing some aspect of the Realms as "stupid." I truly don't understand your contempt for the Realms and its designers and authors. I would point out that your explanation for your characterization of the Wall as "stupid" is not an example of stupidity, but rather an example of inequity. Your objection should be that the Wall is inequitable--not stupid.
Contempt is such an interesting word, isn't it? In the sense that I find a number of design elements inferior and unworthy of inclusion in the Realms, I suppose that I have contempt for those "design features" as you have described them before. However, you're attempting to equate my disdain for those design elements with personal contempt for the designers and writers - and it needs to stop.
Having said that, the Wall of the Faithless is not only inequitable it's a stupid design element.
Second, I don't think you have proved your argument that the Wall is a punishment. It is a fate, but there is no active punishing going on.
Really, Gray? Again, I think you need to go back and re-read the sources that you like to quote.
According to the 3rd edition FRCS, under the "City of Judgment":
"All of the Faithless receive the same punishment: they form a living wall around the City of Judgment, held together by a supernatural greenish mold. This mold prevents them from escaping the wall and eventually breaks down their substance until the soul and its consciousness are dissolved."
Also, in the 3rd edition PGtF, under "Fugue Plane Inhabitants":
"The souls of the Faithless form a living wall around the city..." and "...except the Faithless, who are doomed to be dissolved into the substance of the plane."
So, all this stuff you've been saying about statues and solidifying, I suppose I even bought into it there for a minute. But it's really just your own speculation. The souls are stuck in the wall by the mold, and can't get out unless demons break them free, but they are in fact a writhing mass of soul-bodies and they are trying to escape. Additionally, it's the mold that is consistently described as the dissolving agent for the souls. It's never described as "Realms physics" or a "natural process" for souls to otherwise dissolve. That, again, is your own belief.
You have not shown that the petitioners in the wall would be animate regardless of their being stacked on the wall. Without a divine spark provided by a deity or an afterlife, there is no evidence to show that the petitioner bodies don't just run out of juice and petrify on their own.
See above, they're animate until they're dissolved. In re-reading the sources, I haven't seen where it suggests any kind of petrification. I have said that before, but it was because I mistakenly bought into what you were saying.
Thirdly, I don't think everyone would agree that the Wall is torture, or even unpleasant. I am not aware of any source that says this process is painful. While I guess it can't be ruled out, I am not aware of a source that says it, and I don't think you should assume it.
And you shouldn't assume that it isn't painful. Pain comes in a variety of forms, as well: physical, mental, and spiritual (granted, I'm trusting learned theologians from many faiths on that last one).
If you can't see how being trapped in a mass of bodies and having your soul and your consciousness slowly dissolved over time isn't torture, particularly when multiple sources do in fact call it punishment, then I'm not sure there is anything that I could say to convince you.
Fourthly, the Wall is not a permanent fate. The mold in the mortar of the Wall breaks down the petitioner body until at some point it fades away. While what happens after that (is the soul reincarnated? Absorbed into the plane?) remains unknown, the petitioner's time in the Wall is temporary. Arguably, if the petitioner were allowed to petrify and stand around on the Fugue Plane for eternity without the benefit of the Wall breaking him down, that might be a truly horrible, maddening fate. I reiterate that Kelemvor placing someone on the Wall strikes me as a mercy, not a punishment.
Gods protect us from your vision of mercy. However, it's not an unknown fate. See above, they dissolve into the plane. They aren't "freed" to go back to a Bastion of Unborn Souls (which is core and optional, not Realms).
It just seems silly to me to argue that the Wall is stupid because it is somehow unfair.
Isn't Kelemvor supposed to be known for "fair judgment," though? And yet he allows and endorses this amazingly unfair creation of Myrkul's to still exist? And don't give me any "maybe it's a thing decreed by Ao to exist" nonsense because all greater deities can re-shape their domains however they see fit.
Well, firstly, the time for redemption is during your lifetime. You even get a grace period. You can bargain with the devils. Or presumably you can select a patron even after your death, up until the moment that Kelemvor at your judgment asks you "have you chosen a patron?" The Wall is only a last resort for people who have chosen no other fate. In the words of the famous Getty Lee: "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!"
Oh my, the famous Geddy Lee quote which assumes so much and is so very wrong at the same time! It's interesting that you're going there, but I'll respond to it. You're assuming that being in a particular faith involves free choice, when it often does not.
Choices, whether one believes in "free will" or not (the belief is irrelevant), are not only colored by external circumstances but are often determined by them to a large degree. A farmer cannot choose to continue farming if blight, rot, or other naturally occurring events destroy his crops. Illness, being born poor, experiencing famine, war, inheriting bad genetics, having violent and abusive relatives, etc... quite frankly, there's a whole host of personally uncontrollable events that will strongly infuence the "choices" one makes in life. Faith in gods or higher beings often has more to do with parental beliefs, cultural exposure, and societal norms than it ever does with personal "choice." Male drow, for example, might refuse to worship Lolth and may live their entire lives not knowing of Corellon. Children often give lipservice to religious figures until they are old enough to truly make decisions for themselves; they may not have faith until they are old enough to understand it.
Completely free choice is one of those things that's more of an illusion and a belief than reality. And most of the time, it's believed by people who have merely been lucky and have always been in the position to make "good choice" vs "good choice" types of decisions. It's also used by those same people to re-frame their luck as "I've always made good choices, and others have not, so it's their fault they are poor, downtrodden, or whatnot."
Also, in the Realms, whether or not it's "faith" is a good question. For priests, who receive the benefit of spells and generally know some of the rules and workings of the universe, it's not really a question of faith; it's a question of adherence to dogma. For commoners, it is often a question of faith: priests and mages both have spells, they have commanding presences, and it's very likely that they'll believe whatever their told by powerful, experienced, and educated individuals who protect them from raiding orcs. That's the influence of culture, and authority figures, and rarely can be called a "choice" much less free will.
So Geddy Lee? Wrong. Good music, but wrong.
But secondly, again, it's not permanent! There is a great unknown for that soul after it is disolved by the mortar in the Wall. If it is true that the soul returns to the Bastion of Unborn Souls to be born again, then there is your chance at redemption right there. He's got a chance.
There's no Bastion of Unborn Souls in the Realms unless an individual DM puts one there. The "Bastion" is a core option, not any form of Realms canon whatsoever, from 3rd edition Magic of Incarnum. The entire concept of Incarnum is just an optional element.
And it is described as an unchangeable, permanent fate. Discorporating, and having one's residue merge with the plane is about as permanent as you get. Further, Kelemvor "has never been known to change his mind" about those he sticks in the wall.
So in conclusion: Not a punishment. Not really all that bad, all things considered. Not unfair. And then again, who said (after)life was fair? It is what it is.
Punishment? It's described that way in source books.
Not all that bad? Really? Slow dissolution of your soul by mold (your soulstuff body-parts eaten away) and the dissolution of your consciousness (the equivalent of losing your mind), while other soul-bodies writhe constantly against you? Where's the opportunity for "quiet reflection" there? You make it sound like some kind of contemplative Buddhist retreat, when it's clearly described as a punishment.
It's completely unfair, considering that good people (including children who may have only ever given lipservice while rolling their eyes in church) are forced into the Wall while heretics and other deity-betrayers become civil servants.
However, you're attempting to equate my disdain for those design elements with personal contempt for the designers and writers - and it needs to stop.
I'm not "attempting" to equate it. I equate it. Your defense is like saying "I don't hate my wife, I just hate her ugly face." At that point you are just splitting hairs. You seem to express an awful lot of contempt for various aspects of the Realms, without ever saying much positive. As a Realms fan, when I see such contempt, I tend to call people out on it. For someone who likes to dish out so much criticism, you seem awfully thin-skinned when criticism is leveled at yourself.
There are polite and respectful ways of expressing constructive criticism without calling the designers "stupid." If you were to avail yourself of those methods you would not come off as so mean and antagonistic.
The Bastion of Unborn Souls actually goes back much farther than the Incarnum book. The Bastion, one of many soul fonts on the Positive Energy Plane, goes back at least to the module "The Bastion of Broken Souls" by Bruce Cordell (a Realms designer and author, though that adventure is not specifically a Realms module) and it may have it's roots in prior lore. Souls come from somewhere in the Realms, no reason to think they don't come from fonts of pre-incarnate souls in the Positive Energy Plane (now stirred up in the Elemental Chaos in 4th edition) as they do for the rest of core D&D.
Next, your argument that the Wall is a punishment is just quibbling over semantics. Yes the FRCS says that "All of the Faithless receive the same punishment" (emphasis yours) however, the word "punishment" has multiple definitions. One of the definitions is "sentence" as in to pronounce judgment against. Likewise, one of the definitions of "doom" is "a judgment, decision, or sentence" and also "a fate or destiny." I would argue that it is these meanings that were meant by the writer of those phrases (I believe it was Sean K. Reynolds who wrote them). As such, yes the Wall is the fate or destiny that the Faithless are sentenced to. But again, as fates go, it is not such a bad one.
Compare this fate, for example, to the fate of worshippers of Loviatar, who will doubtless experience real torture for the duration of their afterlife. The Wall sounds somewhat better to me. Although, then again, some of Loviatar's petitioners may actually like the torture, so I guess even that fate is kind of relative. Note, I don't think the Wall was intended to be Club Med. It's not really a pleasant fate either. It is a (relatively) neutral fate. Not really good or bad. It just is what it is.
As for free choice, it means selecting from the available alternatives. Of course no one ever has an abundance of wonderful options to select from. It is naive to think one would. Often the options are few and difficult. So what? If you want a pleasant afterlife, then pick a patron who offers one. Simple as that.
You remind me of a quote from the Black Adder series where Black Adder says "Well, it is so often the way, sir, too late one thinks of what one should have said. Sir Thomas More, for instance--burned alive for refusing to recant his Catholicism--must have been kicking himself, as the flames licked higher, that it never occurred to him to say, "I recant my Catholicism!"
Of course, Sir Thomas More was canonized as a saint for his martyrdom. So from Black Adder's perspective, More was being "stupid", where other people found his choice to be an honorable, even saintly expression of his sincere conviction in his faith. That is what I mean about honoring people's choice to go to the Wall.
Now some people, through hesitation, or lack of understanding, may simply fail to make a decision on a patron. Well, in life there are time limits and deadlines. The Wall is the ultimate dead line. It's the default for persons who do not make a choice. One can intentionally choose to go to the Wall, or by indecision, in failing to make any other choice, one can unintentionally be sentenced to the Wall. But my point in invoking Geddy Lee was merely to illustrate that choosing not to decide is itself a choice. Either way, it's a choice.
I personally don't believe in (overly) protecting people from the consequences of their choices. You might not agree with their choice. You might consider the outcome "stupid." But I don't think the outcome is unfair. It is fair in that there are rules and that the petitioners have a chance at an alternate outcome. The outcome they get is of their own choosing.
Time and time again your argument seems to come back to the notion that the Wall is "stupid" because it is "unfair." Such arguments hearken back to the cries of a petulant child. "It's unfair!" a child might scream. But the adult knows better. The adult knows two things that the child does not: 1) that fairness is not always so simple, it is often quite complex; and 2) that life is not always fair.
Cheetahs eat gazelles. Houses burn down in fires. A simple cut can lead to a fatal infection. Bad things happen to good people every day. Perhaps in that sense the Wall reflects a fundamental reality.
Yes, Kelemvor is a god. But gods are embodiments of natural phenomena--like death, love, cold, the sun, and commerce. You may see the Wall as an artifact of a capricious and "unfair" deity. I see the Wall as a metaphor for destiny. Specifically the destiny of those who will not bow down to gods in a universe where gods are a fact of nature, part of the physics of the Realms. Arguing with the Wall is like arguing with gravity. You can say it is "stupid" or "unfair" yet things fall down all the same.
I'm not "attempting" to equate it. I equate it. Your defense is like saying "I don't hate my wife, I just hate her ugly face." At that point you are just splitting hairs. You seem to express an awful lot of contempt for various aspects of the Realms, without ever saying much positive. As a Realms fan, when I see such contempt, I tend to call people out on it. For someone who likes to dish out so much criticism, you seem awfully thin-skinned when criticism is leveled at yourself.
It's really unfortunate that you can't separate criticism of the material from criticism of an individual (or group). Your conclusion is erroneous, as well. You can, in fact, love a person whether or not you dislike some particular behavior. I know that I have that capacity. Some people detest the fact that their spouses smoke cigarettes, but they still love their spouses. Now I'm not saying I love or hate the designers or authors, my opinion of them as people could be quite different. And frankly, I couldn't tell you who among the designers of the time actually wrote/designed the part about the Wall without looking at the credits in those books. This really isn't about them as people.
There are polite and respectful ways of expressing constructive criticism without calling the designers "stupid." If you were to avail yourself of those methods you would not come off as so mean and antagonistic.
When did I call the designers of the Wall "stupid"? Looks like I said "stupid design element." Again, whether or not someone views me as "mean and antagonistic" probably has more to do with your perception and a difficulty separating criticism of material from criticism of the author. I'd agree that I'm certainly opinionated and often critical of newer material, though.
The Bastion of Unborn Souls actually goes back much farther than the Incarnum book. The Bastion, one of many soul fonts on the Positive Energy Plane, goes back at least to the module "The Bastion of Broken Souls" by Bruce Cordell (a Realms designer and author, though that adventure is not specifically a Realms module) and it may have it's roots in prior lore. Souls come from somewhere in the Realms, no reason to think they don't come from fonts of pre-incarnate souls in the Positive Energy Plane (now stirred up in the Elemental Chaos in 4th edition) as they do for the rest of core D&D.
I'm aware of Cordell's module, and you've re-affirmed my point that it's not specifically a Realms module. It's written for core, so you can use it or not based on personal taste. But there's no reason at all to think that what's optional (as a module or a supplement) for core is canon for Realms cosmology or any other cosmology for that matter.
Next, your argument that the Wall is a punishment is just quibbling over semantics. Yes the FRCS says that "All of the Faithless receive the same punishment" (emphasis yours) however, the word "punishment" has multiple definitions...
Sorry, sounds like you're quibbling here, not me. I just emphasized it because you previously denied that it was a punishment at all. You even suggested that it was a time for quiet contemplation. So I pointed out a reference where they distinctly refer to it as a punishment.
As for free choice, it means selecting from the available alternatives. Of course no one ever has an abundance of wonderful options to select from. It is naive to think one would. Often the options are few and difficult. So what? If you want a pleasant afterlife, then pick a patron who offers one. Simple as that.
Simple as that, sure. Again, "choice" of what one believes in a particular faith isn't simple or as free as one might like to think for the poor, uneducated, or those who start out with problems early in life. You are viewing this with the lenses of someone who, by a Realms commoner's standards, would probably be equivalent to a landed noble, wealthy aristocrat, or perhaps an educated sage (based on your ability and free time to research and argue the details of a hobby such as this). As such, it is easy for you to see potential choices that they may not even have the ability to imagine or comprehend. And if you don't know that you have a choice, the environs will often do the choosing for you.
Such a person, who may lead a simple backwoods life as a common hunter or farmer, might indeed "worship" by giving lipservice to various deities without choosing one as a patron. That's not worship in the sense that a priest or nobleman lay worshipper might worship (sacrifices, specific deeds, adhering to a dogma), but he might live a good and kind life for 50-80 some years without choosing a specific patron and still get a ticket right into the wall. Those are the "rules" you're defending (and you agreed with me that this was in fact a likely fate earlier). But if any deity is going to call themselves "good" then they should in fact find such a fate for Mr. Commoner morally offensive. If any deity is going to say that they engage in "fair judgment" then they should in fact deem such a fate quite unfair. The existence of the Wall might even be proof that the good deities aren't really worthy of being called good, and that Kelemvor is in fact unfair. It's his choice to keep it there, after all, since it's his domain.
Yes, Kelemvor is a god. But gods are embodiments of natural phenomena--like death, love, cold, the sun, and commerce. You may see the Wall as an artifact of a capricious and "unfair" deity. I see the Wall as a metaphor for destiny. Specifically the destiny of those who will not bow down to gods in a universe where gods are a fact of nature, part of the physics of the Realms. Arguing with the Wall is like arguing with gravity. You can say it is "stupid" or "unfair" yet things fall down all the same.
You appear to have sold yourself on the idea that the Wall is a part of nature and the natural world, when in fact it's not "natural" at all but a construct maintained by a deity in a plane made of supernatural "stuff." It's not like gravity or anything in the natural world, really. It's composed of souls, held together by supernatural goop, all maintained and kept in place solely by Kelemvor's will. There's nothing "natural" about it, other than the fact that it sort of looks like a wall from a distance. It's a holdover from Myrkul's days, without too much change. Greater gods are the supreme decision makers when it comes to designing and managing their domains. So it's quite emphatically not a part of nature.
Keeping it intact meant that Kelemvor chose to retain a method of unfair, enduring torture used by his quite evil predecessor. That's the bottom line. It's ineffective as a method of ensuring worship through fear (although that's the intent), because there's nothing to suggest that knowledge of the Wall (or indeed, the fate of the False) is widely preached by all the churches in the Realms (or any, for that matter). As I've said before, it's a punishment for not knowing the "fine print" in a system where there are many as-yet-unknown aspects of the afterlife, many things not known to the general population, many different heresies in multiple churches, and a clear tendency for both good and evil deities to masquerade as other beings or even deities with sometimes quite different dogmatic beliefs.
Of course you can dislike things about people you love. But that's no excuse for abusive behavior. If you want to get your wife to stop smoking, you point out the problems with smoking and the merits of alternative courses of action, you don't tell her she's "stupid."
Lastly, I think I have already said everything I have to say at the moment about the Wall. I doubt you will be convinced and I don't want to rehash the same material. My goal was to help other people to reflect on the Wall from different perspectives and consider that it might not be so "stupid" or "unfair" as you deem it to be.
Let's say the wall is a punishment for the faithless, because ether they don't know better or they chose not to choose, all the better a reason for priests of the various deities to missioner these "blanks" so they have an angel who will choose them in the afterlife.
There could be grand adventures where two rivaling deities are duking it out in the form of two priests and a cult in between there.
I think it's essential to remember:
The gods do exist, but their not omnipotent and do rely on priests and angels to bring the faith to the nonbelievers.
(not being eaten away slowly over eons or millenia).
However even the faithful are eventually being eaten by their deities to empower them. They just spend the time between death and being eaten being purged of imperfections in their deities realm before becoming the deity's next meal (from quite literally for some more evil gods to something like being absorbed by the deity in a last loving embrace).
So actually their final fate is not all that different from the faithless
Thirdly, I don't think everyone would agree that the Wall is torture, or even unpleasant.
I am pretty sure that it's written at least once that it's indeed painful, but I can't find the source at the moment.
It's never described as "Realms physics" or a "natural process" for souls to otherwise dissolve. That, again, is your own belief.
It's a general "natural D&D process". Souls who are not claimed by a particular deity but end up as general petitioners of a plane eventually just merge into the fabric of that plane. No soul is really eternal in D&D.
BTW, about the guy who paid lip-service or even some real service to many deities but never chose one as the one special patron, he can still chose before it's too late. A deity might even claim a mortal who at some point gave her some (lip) service even if the mortal has not declared her as patron if no other deity has yet claimed this mortal (Mask once did so to a soul already judged some years before just to spite Kelemvor)
(not being eaten away slowly over eons or millenia).
However even the faithful are eventually being eaten by their deities to empower them. They just spend the time between death and being eaten being purged of imperfections in their deities realm before becoming the deity's next meal (from quite literally for some more evil gods to something like being absorbed by the deity in a last loving embrace).So actually their final fate is not all that different from the faithless
Mirtek, I had heard the same about the faithful slowly becoming one with their dieties but I can't remember where I read the info. Mind pointing me in the right direction?
However even the faithful are eventually being eaten by their deities to empower them. They just spend the time between death and being eaten being purged of imperfections in their deities realm before becoming the deity's next meal (from quite literally for some more evil gods to something like being absorbed by the deity in a last loving embrace).So actually their final fate is not all that different from the faithless.
I hope they end up being served in a nice Béchamel sauce, with little vegetable compotes on the side and a nice white wine.
Can't see that as a bad thing, myself.
Even without it, I would think one's actions, rather than one's words, would be more important. If person A acts in accordance with (say) Torm's portfolio, but doesn't worship anybody, but person B claims to worship Torm but doesn't act in accordance with that, why should B get the reward? You shouldn't get rewarded or punished just because you decide not to brownnose.
Funny you specifically mention Torm, because book 4 of the Avatar Series (I refuse to call it a Trilogy, since there's basically 5 books) deals with an individual who claims to be one of Torm's faithful, but ends up being judged Faithless (or False, I forget which).
Thats right! There is a map!
Mirtek, I had heard the same about the faithful slowly becoming one with their dieties but I can't remember where I read the info. Mind pointing me in the right direction?
It's in On Hallowed Grounds in the section about what happens to petitioners.
Funny you specifically mention Torm, because book 4 of the Avatar Series (I refuse to call it a Trilogy, since there's basically 5 books) deals with an individual who claims to be one of Torm's faithful, but ends up being judged Faithless (or False, I forget which).
I would think that a deity can reject a mortal's claim, they don't have to pick up any mortal who declares to be their worshiper.
IIRC the incident correctly he was standing before Cyric and received his judgment, then clamined to be Torm's faithful and his mention of Torm's name was enough to draw Torm to manifest in Cyric's throne room to argue with Cyric about who gets the soul. I don't recall who eventually kept the soul.
Can't see that as a bad thing, myself.
Even without it, I would think one's actions, rather than one's words, would be more important. If person A acts in accordance with (say) Torm's portfolio, but doesn't worship anybody, but person B claims to worship Torm but doesn't act in accordance with that, why should B get the reward? You shouldn't get rewarded or punished just because you decide not to brownnose.
Funny you specifically mention Torm, because book 4 of the Avatar Series (I refuse to call it a Trilogy, since there's basically 5 books) deals with an individual who claims to be one of Torm's faithful, but ends up being judged Faithless (or False, I forget which).
You are thinking about a main character from The Twilight Giants trilogy when he said that he worshipped Torm in his heart or something to that effect. But he did not pay any tribute or in some physical manner show his worship to torm. He did, however, pay tribute to Mask when he was younger with a offering so Kelemvor (after many events) said Torm had no claim over his soul and gave him to Mask.
Can't see that as a bad thing, myself.
Even without it, I would think one's actions, rather than one's words, would be more important. If person A acts in accordance with (say) Torm's portfolio, but doesn't worship anybody, but person B claims to worship Torm but doesn't act in accordance with that, why should B get the reward? You shouldn't get rewarded or punished just because you decide not to brownnose.
Funny you specifically mention Torm, because book 4 of the Avatar Series (I refuse to call it a Trilogy, since there's basically 5 books) deals with an individual who claims to be one of Torm's faithful, but ends up being judged Faithless (or False, I forget which).
You are thinking about a main character from The Twilight Giants trilogy when he said that he worshipped Torm in his heart or something to that effect. But he did not pay any tribute or in some physical manner show his worship to torm. He did, however, pay tribute to Mask when he was younger with a offering so Kelemvor (after many events) said Torm had no claim over his soul and gave him to Mask.
No no no, hes thinking of the guy from the begining of Prince of Lies, who was being chased by giants, Cyric appeared before him as Torm and gave him a magicsword that was like a +10 vs giants, so the guy (dont remember his name) went to fight the giant with his magic sword, as it turns out though, the magic sword was actually just a worthless leg bone or something, so needles to say he died a horrible and gruesome death, Cyric then sentenced him to the Wall, Torm shows and offers to take the guy back to his place, but he has to be able to read the inscriptions on Torm's gauntlets, the guy is not truely faithfull to Torm, so he cant do it, So Torm can do nothing about it and leaves the guy to his fate. Its been awhile since Ive read that one, but I believe things ended up working out for him and he ended up redeeming hisself in the eyes of Torm.
Can't see that as a bad thing, myself.
Even without it, I would think one's actions, rather than one's words, would be more important. If person A acts in accordance with (say) Torm's portfolio, but doesn't worship anybody, but person B claims to worship Torm but doesn't act in accordance with that, why should B get the reward? You shouldn't get rewarded or punished just because you decide not to brownnose.
Funny you specifically mention Torm, because book 4 of the Avatar Series (I refuse to call it a Trilogy, since there's basically 5 books) deals with an individual who claims to be one of Torm's faithful, but ends up being judged Faithless (or False, I forget which).
It is funny. I grabbed him because he's one of, like, 3 FR gods whose names I can remember and am certain I can spell without looking it up.