The Turakian Age is Seriously Underrated

[Lord Liaden]

15 minutes ago, PhilFleischmann said:

Agreed.  I've always hated the idea that a god's power comes from worshipers.  There's an inherent contradiction:  If the gods created the world and the people in it, but they only get their power from the people who worship them, then how did they have the power to create the world and the people in the first place?

 

That's based on the assumption that the gods actually did create the world, and that it's not all just propaganda. Quite a few fantasy and sci-fi books take the tack that it is propaganda. In the Hero Universe the gods actually remember their own "past" the way their worshipers currently believe it to be.

 

15 minutes ago, PhilFleischmann said:

And if the majority of people worship the good gods, then the good gods will be vastly more powerful than the evil gods.  There would be no evil gods eventually, because they'd lose power whenever people stopped worshipping them.  Mere mortals could effectively remove all evil influences in the world by simply not worshipping evil gods.

 

TA deals with that concept by saying that all the gods of a pantheon, like the High Faith, are worshiped collectively. While there are certain sects that devote themselves especially to a particular god (good, evil, or neutral), for the followers of a faith their belief is in their gods as a whole, so all of them benefit from it.

 

(From a theological point of view Christianity doesn't "need" Satan to exist; but he's such a useful concept to explain so many things it would be uncomfortable to associate with God, he's unlikely to go anywhere for the foreseeable future.) 😈

[Brian Stanfield]

56 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

TA deals with that concept by saying that all the gods of a pantheon, like the High Faith, are worshiped collectively. While there are certain sects that devote themselves especially to a particular god (good, evil, or neutral), for the followers of a faith their belief is in their gods as a whole, so all of them benefit from it.

Not to beat yet another dead horse, but why would anyone "create" an evil god in a pantheon? Or if some people believe in an evil god, why would they include that god in their own pantheon, which they presumably created?

 

Christianity didn't arbitrarily introduce, and therefore "create," Satan as a source of evil. Satan already exists in the Hebrew text, but it means "accuser" or "prosecutor" in many cases, meaning a person who accuses (in some cases it refers definitely to a specific accuser against God). Since Israelis are "people who wrestle with God," the role of struggle with and against God is part of the story that has always been told. "Satan" is either a human with grievance against God, or the embodiment of the fallen angel, Satan, defying God. So the stories precede Christianity, which is notorious for borrowing from many other cultures in defense of their so-called monotheism. 

 

HOWEVER, the stories go a long way toward demonstrating that these sorts of deities come about because of belief, not the other way around, so your point is still solid. I don't want to get too far into the theology of specific religions, since that's totally off topic, and it's really not all that important in game terms, and it's not an issue I'm anxious to stand and defend. In the big picture, as I said, Mr. Carlyle helped me make a lot of sense of the idea of gods emerging from a culture. The particulars are mostly going to be a function of poetic license. 

[PhilFleischmann]

1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

That's based on the assumption that the gods actually did create the world, and that it's not all just propaganda. Quite a few fantasy and sci-fi books take the tack that it is propaganda. In the Hero Universe the gods actually remember their own "past" the way their worshipers currently believe it to be.

In most fantasy worlds, it's not propaganda.  The gods actually did create the world - just like in all historical mythologies - on which all fantasy RPG gods are based.  Assuming we want to emulate that style of world, then the gods actually are gods, and they actually have god-like power, and they actually created the world.  Where does magic come from - particularly "divine" magic?  Is the fantasy world based on a circular "perpetual magic machine"?  People give the power to gods by worshipping, and then the gods grant magic power to the worshippers.  So none of it is real, but somehow real magic effects happen.  And how exactly can gods gain power from mortals'worship?  Because the mortals believe that's how they get their power?  And the gods have to conform to the beliefs of mortals?  It seems to me, the farther you follow this idea, the more in unravels into ridiculousness.

 

I don't actually see anything in the Turakian Age that says that the gods get their power from the worship or faith of mortals, but perhaps I missed it.

[Lord Liaden]

2 hours ago, Brian Stanfield said:

Not to beat yet another dead horse, but why would anyone "create" an evil god in a pantheon? Or if some people believe in an evil god, why would they include that god in their own pantheon, which they presumably created?

 

"This plague has killed thousands of innocents!"

"The malevolent God of Disease has slipped his bonds. We must sacrifice to the Goddess of Healing so she will protect us."

 

"This war has been stirred up by the God of Chaos. Only through acts of piety can we overcome his influence."

 

Evil gods are handy explanations for the ills of the world, without directly blaming benevolent deities. They're even handier as a threat to force social conformity, which has been a major use for religion for millennia.

 

I was aware that Satan predates Christianity; but that doesn't change what the majority of followers of the Abrahamic faiths believe Satan to be today. All religion evolves over time, borrowing and building on past precedents. Zeus was a minor Indo-European weather god before eventually morphing into the king of the Greek pantheon.

[Lord Liaden]

2 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

In most fantasy worlds, it's not propaganda.  The gods actually did create the world - just like in all historical mythologies - on which all fantasy RPG gods are based.  Assuming we want to emulate that style of world, then the gods actually are gods, and they actually have god-like power, and they actually created the world.  Where does magic come from - particularly "divine" magic?  Is the fantasy world based on a circular "perpetual magic machine"?  People give the power to gods by worshipping, and then the gods grant magic power to the worshippers.  So none of it is real, but somehow real magic effects happen.  And how exactly can gods gain power from mortals'worship?  Because the mortals believe that's how they get their power?  And the gods have to conform to the beliefs of mortals?  It seems to me, the farther you follow this idea, the more in unravels into ridiculousness.

 

I mean, what is "real" in this discussion? We're tossing around "gods" and "magic" as though the words have universally-accepted standards, but even in the real world, the definitions of what gods are, and how magic "actually" functions, are multifarious.

 

You can come up with any explanation for how this works that's internally consistent, and logical based on the precedents you choose. Suppose beings with souls pass on a small fraction of their ever-renewing "life force" to the gods through each act of worship. If the gods are getting that from a million worshipers every day, but only have to directly intervene in the affairs of a few thousand a few times a year, that could be a big net gain for them. The gods don't have to conform to their mortal worshipers' beliefs, if they can tell them what they should believe. OTOH if belief creates them, like the Hero Universe gods, they're simply behaving according to their natures, which matches what mortals conceive their natures to be. Chicken and egg.

 

But the fact that one can explain the concept doesn't mean you have to like it, or use it for your own games. But I believe we have to be careful about drawing the distinction between "I don't like it" and "it makes no sense."

  

2 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

I don't actually see anything in the Turakian Age that says that the gods get their power from the worship or faith of mortals, but perhaps I missed it.

 

"To exist, a god needs worship. Worship is his meal; it sustains him and makes him stronger." The Turakian Age p. 289.

[PhilFleischmann]

18 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

I mean, what is "real" in this discussion? We're tossing around "gods" and "magic" as though the words have universally-accepted standards, but even in the real world, the definitions of what gods are, and how magic "actually" functions, are multifarious.

No, I'm not.  I'm using "gods" and "magic" in terms of a fictitious fantasy RPG setting.  This has nothing to do with the real world.  Though it would be nice if it had some verisimilitude, and made sense, and was internally consistent - within that fictitious setting.

 

20 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

But I believe we have to be careful about drawing the distinction between "I don't like it" and "it makes no sense."

I fully acknowledge the distinction.  In this case, both apply:  I don't like it.  And it makes no sense.  Part of the reason I don't like it, is because it makes no sense.  These gods are created by mortals, and not the other way around - then why the heck should anyone worship them?

 

23 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

"To exist, a god needs worship. Worship is his meal; it sustains him and makes him stronger." The Turakian Age p. 289.

Thanks for that.  It's still stupid.  And I think it's a vestigial remnant of that other FRPG system - which it didn't even originally include.  Back when I used to play B&D,I has subscribed to Dragon Magazine, and I remember an article in there that AFAIK, was the first time anyone put forth the idea that gods need worship for fuel, or to exist, or to have power.  I thought it was a dumb idea then, and I still think it's a dumb idea.  Then again, that game system was chock-full of dumb ideas, which is why I no longer play it.

[Lord Liaden]

1 hour ago, PhilFleischmann said:

I fully acknowledge the distinction.  In this case, both apply:  I don't like it.  And it makes no sense.  Part of the reason I don't like it, is because it makes no sense.  These gods are created by mortals, and not the other way around - then why the heck should anyone worship them?

 

A - Because it's not known by the populace of Ambrethel that humans "created" the gods. They believe what the gods have revealed about the origins of the world to be the truth. It's quite possible the gods believe it too.

 

B - Because worshiping the gods brings tangible benefits: healing magic, gifts of knowledge and power, fair weather, fertile crops, healthy children, all the things humans have always prayed to the gods for. While neglecting or offending them brings illness, drought and famine, fire and flood, and other categories of smiting.

 

Like I said, you have every right not to like this concept. I look at it and see logic and internal consistency. To me it makes sense. You look at the same circumstances, and to you it doesn't make sense. This is the point in a discussion when I usually conclude further debate on this issue won't resolve our impasse.

[Ninja-Bear]

2 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

"This plague has killed thousands of innocents!"

"The malevolent God of Disease has slipped his bonds. We must sacrifice to the Goddess of Healing so she will protect us."

 

"This war has been stirred up by the God of Chaos. Only through acts of piety can we overcome his influence."

 

Evil gods are handy explanations for the ills of the world, without directly blaming benevolent deities. They're even handier as a threat to force social conformity, which has been a major use for religion for millennia.

 

I was aware that Satan predates Christianity; but that doesn't change what the majority of followers of the Abrahamic faiths believe Satan to be today. All religion evolves over time, borrowing and building on past precedents. Zeus was a minor Indo-European weather god before eventually morphing into the king of the Greek pantheon.

I got a ocean front property in Montana if your interested.

[Lord Liaden]

Isn't that God's Country?

[DShomshak]

Fantasy RPGs are generally based on Fantasy fiction. Fantasy fiction is generally based on ancient myths and legends, but not taking them at face value.

 

The idea that people invent gods is not new. One of the ancient Greek philosophers, I forget which one, opined that if pigs believed in gods those gods would oink. (Or words to that effect.) William Blake had a more elegant phrasing in Marriage of Heaven and Hell about gods as personifications and metaphors created by poets, that unsophisticated people took as real with help from unscrupulous priests. The Mimamsa school of Hinduism explicitly holds that the gods don't have to be real for the rituals of worship to have power. So Fantasy authors and games aren't completely without precedent in creating worlds in which human belief creates "real" gods.

 

Much of magic draws on symbols and concepts of divine power... but further assumes that gods (or even God) cannot stop mortals from expropriating their power in this way. See Stolen Lightning: A Social Theory of Magic by Daniel Lawrence O'Keefe.

 

So I have no problem with the TA theology, at least in terms of internal consistency. Though some parts are fairly unpleasant, such as the role of faith: worship is the food of the gods, but faith -- belief without evidence, or even in the face of evidence -- is their wine. Which is why they don't just allow, they create religious divisions such as the Hargeshites. If faith is their wine, the gods seem to be alcoholics. And nobody's better than an addict at rationalizing their behavior.

 

In this sense, the TA theology is very much the work of secular people who, how do I put this, don't believe in belief or revere reverence.

 

Dean Shomshak

[Lord Liaden]

Well, to be fair, it's hard not to see a great deal of mythology as self-serving gods propitiated by self-serving people.   Even today, very many people when they pray, pray for things to benefit themselves.

 

However, as Dean himself has pointed out, the ethical dimension in religion has evolved as humanity's theological thought has grown more sophisticated. Why should the same process not have occurred in Ambrethel, with a 5000+ year history of civilization? I wouldn't be surprised if the divisions between Blue, Grey, and Scarlet gods were a lot blurrier in past millennia, including between the gods themselves.

 

Nothing in the books suggest Ambrethelans are aware of the role their worship and faith plays in sustaining the gods. I doubt most Ambrethelans consider their rituals and ceremonies of worship to be other than moderns do, an expression of their devotion and reverence; although as I indicated, there's a transactional component to worship in modern times too.

 

It may be distasteful to think of divinities as deliberately misleading their followers in order to exploit them... but remember that we're talking about gods, not God. If the gods of Ambrethel were created out of the thoughts of imperfect humans, how can we expect them to be perfect?

[Lord Liaden]

And just to put a topper on the Turakian theological debate , that world even has a monotheistic faith. The people of the Vornakkian city-state of Kurum-Sathiri (Sithians) worship a single god they call Mahin ("the highest"), whose priests claim he's the only god that exists. All other gods are either demons in disguise, or aspects/avatars of Mahin through which he chooses to speak to "unbelievers." The priesthood of Mahin is organized in a strict hierarchy, led by the Mahinture ("mouth of Mahin").

 

That this religion is based out of Kurum-Sathiri intrigues me, because Sithian society is otherwise described as a true mageocracy, with social status tied to spell-casting ability, and the ruling Ar-King being the most powerful mage in the land, as determined by Duel Arcane with any rivals. I can only guess whether possession of divine healing magic may contribute to comparable status for priests. However, it would seem reasonable to assume that with two such powerful societal pillars supporting them, the Ar-King and the Mahinture must be at loggerheads at least sometimes over some issues, not unlike the relationship between the medieval Holy Roman Emperor and the Pope. There has to be some plot-potential in that situation.

[PhilFleischmann]

What about the gods of Thun?  They seem to be "real" gods, not created by the beliefs of mortals, nor "fed" by prayer, nor influenced by mortal beliefs.

 

None of the classic mythologies include the idea that the gods are created and shaped by the beliefs of mortals.  And neither to Tolkien's gods in The Silmarillion.  I don't know of any fantasy literature that includes gods, that also includes the idea that they are created by mortals, and not the other way around.  Granted, I'm not an expert on fantasy literature, but AFAIK, most of the gods of "classic" fantasy literature, work the same way as Tolkien or classic mythology.  Lieber, Moorcock, Lovecraft, etc.

 

And within the Turakian Age, what about the demons, and other supernatural beings that are worshipped?  Are they also created by the belief of mortals?  How far down does this go?  Demon "lords and princes", demon dukes and barons, demon henchmen and underlings, all the way down to the nameless demon hordes?

[Scott Ruggels]

Phil,

 

I think the theology trope of gods are powered and elevated by the strength/number of worshippers is a reflection of The Hero System itself , in that as a beak from the ineffable stratification of D&D, or the incomprehensiblility of Gloranthan cults, that even from the earliest days of Fantasy Hero,  people have wanted to stat out gods, and then figure out how to power them. Whether the gods are real or not, you can crank out a lot of power from a OIF temple, full of worshippers, with a priest leading the flock through weekly sets of gestures and incantations. What is done with that power is directed by doctrine and theology, and also maybe a bit of political self interest. Also in the early days, RL organized religion, the denigration of Table Top RPGs, May have boosted or created a number of atheists in the hobby, who use that mechanic to create gods for their campaigns, without having to concede the point of divinity or a “higher power”. 

 

I created a magic system for the Jaggiri on similar principles, of group casting inside of defined spaces , though their power was not made for ecclesiastical reasons, but just for controlled brute power. 

 

Hero is not well suited to “soft” magic systems, and that also includes “higher powers”. 

[Brian Stanfield]

5 hours ago, DShomshak said:

One of the ancient Greek philosophers, I forget which one, opined that if pigs believed in gods those gods would oink. (Or words to that effect.)

 

Xenophanes, and for what it's worth, he talked of cows and lions in his example. 

 

5 hours ago, DShomshak said:

William Blake had a more elegant phrasing in Marriage of Heaven and Hell about gods as personifications and metaphors created by poets, that unsophisticated people took as real with help from unscrupulous priests. The Mimamsa school of Hinduism explicitly holds that the gods don't have to be real for the rituals of worship to have power. So Fantasy authors and games aren't completely without precedent in creating worlds in which human belief creates "real" gods.

 

So these are two different things, really, which was my original point. Blake's example is cynical and probably not untrue. The ancient polytheistic gods were embodiments of natural phenomena (the sun god, the fertility goddess, etc.), so they were worshipped before they were named, and only later were they personified in pantheons. So the gods were in one sense "created," but not out of nothing as it feels in TA. The unscrupulous part is probably equally true.

 

But the example of Hinduism, with its thousands of gods, is a different example. It's probably a good analogue to TA in some ways. Sure the gods don't have to be "real" for rituals to have power, but in Hinduism they're all just different aspects of Brahman anyway, so they are individual ways to the God. So even if I create an angry lobster god to worship, it is the aspect of Brahman which it represents that has power, which is (presumably) already there in Brahman; I've only selected my perspective of Brahman to emphasize for worship. Did I "create" the angry lobster god? Sure. Does it get its power from me? I didn't create the angry lobster god, whom I shall now call Crustaphelous, out of nothing. Or did I? This is the constant paradox of Hinduism. It's all Brahman anyway. But it's definitely not saying that these gods were created by humans and get their power from human worship, and then believe in their own existence based upon that worship. 

 

This is where I part ways from the TA pantheon. It seems a bit shallow to suggest people were so stupid that they decided they needed a god of war to believe in who could give them power, so they randomly started to believe in it, and then it became real and self-aware, and therefore became able to give the believers power. This was my original comment on the circularity of it all. But it is, after all, just fiction. Maybe it's all, after all, just fiction . . .

 

I'm not really trying to push a theological debate. My original point was that these are the reasons why I never cared much for deities in RPGs.

 

4 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

However, as Dean himself has pointed out, the ethical dimension in religion has evolved as humanity's theological thought has grown more sophisticated. Why should the same process not have occurred in Ambrethel, with a 5000+ year history of civilization? I wouldn't be surprised if the divisions between Blue, Grey, and Scarlet gods were a lot blurrier in past millennia, including between the gods themselves.

 

Nothing in the books suggest Ambrethelans are aware of the role their worship and faith plays in sustaining the gods. I doubt most Ambrethelans consider their rituals and ceremonies of worship to be other than moderns do, an expression of their devotion and reverence; although as I indicated, there's a transactional component to worship in modern times too.

 

These are EXCELLENT points, LL, and I find them entirely satisfying reasons for accepting the TA pantheon as it stands.

 

As I said, I'm not really trying to start a religious war here, I was just pointing out something in an earlier post that I probably should have been wise enough to just leave alone, mostly because it's just my own personal idiosyncrasy and not an issue with the TA setting. Sorry to needlessly derail things! Although I'm glad I did because I finally got some answers to the questions I've had for years about these things!

[Lord Liaden]

3 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

What about the gods of Thun?  They seem to be "real" gods, not created by the beliefs of mortals, nor "fed" by prayer, nor influenced by mortal beliefs.

 

TA p. 90 explicitly states that the "gods" of Thun aren't gods at all, in the metaphysical sense. They're Elder Worm of tremendous magical power, too strong to be killed when Mankind and Man's proto-gods overthrew the Worm overlords of Earth. Instead they were imprisoned deep beneath Thun, similarly to Takofanes. The Thunese work to free them, and in exchange receive such trickles of knowledge and power as their gods can release past their bonds.

 

3 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

None of the classic mythologies include the idea that the gods are created and shaped by the beliefs of mortals.  And neither to Tolkien's gods in The Silmarillion.  I don't know of any fantasy literature that includes gods, that also includes the idea that they are created by mortals, and not the other way around.  Granted, I'm not an expert on fantasy literature, but AFAIK, most of the gods of "classic" fantasy literature, work the same way as Tolkien or classic mythology.  Lieber, Moorcock, Lovecraft, etc.

 

The example that first comes to my mind is Fred Saberhagen's "Book of Swords" series: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_of_Swords#Gods . Fritz Leiber's stories of Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser appear similar, in that they describe many gods as beginning first as the memory of mortal men and women, achieving godhood as their worshipers increase; and if they lose the belief of their worshipers, they may die. https://scrollsoflankhmar.com/rpgguide:godsofnehwon

 

EDIT: I'd also include Poul Anderson's early novel (1954) The Broken Sword, which presents a Faerie dimension in which all the gods of its adjacent parts of the world are real and coexistent; but some of them have been forgotten and effectively exiled to distant corners of Faerie, particularly in Europe with the spread of Christianity. With the loss of their worshipers they become diminished, although still formidable. http://www.castaliahouse.com/retrospective-the-broken-sword-by-poul-anderson/

(Michael Moorcock has cited The Broken Sword as having been highly influential to his own fiction.)

 

3 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

And within the Turakian Age, what about the demons, and other supernatural beings that are worshipped?  Are they also created by the belief of mortals?  How far down does this go?  Demon "lords and princes", demon dukes and barons, demon henchmen and underlings, all the way down to the nameless demon hordes?

 

Sorry to tell you, but, Yes. The Netherworld is the realm containing all the "hells" of every human religion/mythology, and their demonic denizens; and they're just as "imaginal" as the mythic gods and creatures in Faerie, and the gods, angels, etc of modern religions in Elysium.

 

But if it makes you feel better, all these dimensions are just the Inner Planes connected to Earth, generated by human thought and life-energy (and the energy of other living things on this planet). Beyond our corner of the Astral Plane lie the Outer Planes, whose inhabitants include beings who could be considered "true" gods: embodiments of fundamental concepts of reality, such as Chaos, Nature, Death, or Time; right up to the ultimate Creator of all things, at the crown of the Sephirothic Tree of Life. These are the makers and sustainers not just of Earth, but the entire Multiverse, who existed before any mortal beings, and have no need for our worship, or any interest in us beyond our use to their own cosmic purposes.

 

(All this is explained in the Champions source book, The Mystic World.)

[Lord Liaden]

4 hours ago, Brian Stanfield said:

 

So these are two different things, really, which was my original point. Blake's example is cynical and probably not untrue. The ancient polytheistic gods were embodiments of natural phenomena (the sun god, the fertility goddess, etc.), so they were worshipped before they were named, and only later were they personified in pantheons. So the gods were in one sense "created," but not out of nothing as it feels in TA. The unscrupulous part is probably equally true.

 

[SNIP]

 

This is where I part ways from the TA pantheon. It seems a bit shallow to suggest people were so stupid that they decided they needed a god of war to believe in who could give them power, so they randomly started to believe in it, and then it became real and self-aware, and therefore became able to give the believers power. This was my original comment on the circularity of it all. But it is, after all, just fiction. Maybe it's all, after all, just fiction . . .

 

 

What the various allusions to gods in Hero books all but state, is that godhood is an evolutionary process. In several different books there are references to "proto-gods;" created out of human imagination, but not yet at full divine power, part of a coherent pantheon or mythic cosmology, having their own dimensional realm, or other trappings of true mythic gods. There's even a write-up for a "failed" proto-god in Book Of Dragons. Even after a god comes fully into being, it's still subject to further mutation as its worshipers' beliefs in it change over time. For example, one of the Atlantean gods during their era of global empire is a war god named Ares, but he's more of a noble warrior than the Greek god of that name, and also judge of the dead and ruler of the Underworld. Tikarion, the ancient Atlantean king of the gods, is in several ways very much like the Turakian god-king Kilbern. During the Turakian Age, Mordak the leader of the evil Scarlet Gods, is also the god of darkness; while in the later Atlantean Age, the kingdom of Kaphtor is patronized by a god named Mor'daki, who looks different from how Mordak is described but is also a god of darkness.

 

EDIT: This can go also go for demons in the Netherworld as well, albeit in kind of the opposite direction. For example, many of the famous devils from Western grimoire demonology -- Beelzebub, Astaroth, Moloch, and others -- began as Middle Eastern gods who were "demonized" by their Israelite neighbors. As their cults were displaced by newer religions, these gods devolved into demons sustaining themselves by consuming the souls of the damned.

[DShomshak]

Incidentally, I vaguely remember a short story by, I think, L. Sprague deCamp in which a con man decides the big money is in religion, so he invents a god and uses his acting and oratoriacal skills to popularize it. The donations start rolling in! And then the god manifests. Oops.

 

DeCamp, Saberhagen, Leiber and Anderson also wrote a lot of SF as well as Fantasy, and I suspect it shaped their development of the "belief creates gods" trope. As I alluded above, it seems to me like a clever notion for people who like playing ideas but who don't really care much about faith or religion.

 

I have to include myself among that group. When Steve Long assembled the CU, he adopted a lot of the mystic cosmology I invented in The Ultimate Super-Mage. In it, I had belief and story creating spirits, gods and entire dimensions. This seemed like a good justification for the "kitchen sink" nature of the standard superhero universe, in which an angel of the Lord and the mighty Thor can be equally real. Marvel and DC kind of waffled on this, with talk of a Supreme Deity who was strongly suggested to be the Abrahamic Deity while the pagan mythic figures were merely powerful entities living in pocket dimensions. I wasn't willing to privilege one mythology over another, so I made Yahweh as much a creation of human belief as Odin or Zeus. And having the gods all be delusional, believing their own myths, sidestepped the clashing origin myths. At least the gods aren't all consciously lying to their worshipers.

 

TA is part of the CU, so it has to use the same cosmology. This world can't be created by gods, because the contemporary CU's Earth wasn't created by gods. One may not like this approach to Fantasy world design. But it's a consequence of splicing together two different genres. Which, as I have said before, I don't think was a good idea in the first place. So I don't entirely disagree with Phil on this.

 

Dean Shomshak

[Brian Stanfield]

On 2/10/2020 at 1:48 PM, DShomshak said:

Stolen Lightning: A Social Theory of Magic by Daniel Lawrence O'Keefe.

 

Thanks for this. I just ordered it and am looking forward to looking at it!

[PhilFleischmann]

20 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

TA p. 90 explicitly states that the "gods" of Thun aren't gods at all, in the metaphysical sense. They're Elder Worm of tremendous magical power, too strong to be killed when Mankind and Man's proto-gods overthrew the Worm overlords of Earth. Instead they were imprisoned deep beneath Thun, similarly to Takofanes. The Thunese work to free them, and in exchange receive such trickles of knowledge and power as their gods can release past their bonds.

To me, that would make them the *only* gods of the TA.  One of the essential, definitional aspects of a god is that it came before the world, or before mortals - and most likely created the world or created the mortals.  To say that mortals created the gods is bass-ackwards.  It completely disrupts my willful suspension of disbelief.  It ruins the immersive experience.  Sure, it's fine if you want to run a silly game - I enjoy silliness, too.  But if I'm playing in a "serious fantasy setting that's intended to feel as real as possible, then it shouldn't break the fourth wall and include modern-day, real-world memes in it.

 

And the priests of Thun still get their spells, don't they?  I can't think of any aspect of them that makes them not gods.  They are cosmically powerful beings that predate mankind, grant "divine" spells to worshippers, and have a consciousness and a will.  And they presumably had some involvement in making the world what it is today (even if they weren't involved in the initial creation).

 

20 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

Sorry to tell you, but, Yes. The Netherworld is the realm containing all the "hells" of every human religion/mythology, and their demonic denizens; and they're just as "imaginal" as the mythic gods and creatures in Faerie, and the gods, angels, etc of modern religions in Elysium.

See, that makes even less sense.  This little demonling, build on 25 points, with no name and no personality, exists because someone prayed it into existence?  Because someone had "faith" in it?  I'm reminded of the Monty Python sketch where they build apartment blocks by hypnosis - enjoy all the comforts of modern living, as long as you believe the building exists.  All I can think to say is, "On second thought, let's not go to Ambrethel.  It is a silly place."  Fortunately, one can still play games in this setting without including all this silliness.  And it will presumably play almost exactly the same.

 

21 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

But if it makes you feel better, all these dimensions are just the Inner Planes connected to Earth, generated by human thought and life-energy (and the energy of other living things on this planet). Beyond our corner of the Astral Plane lie the Outer Planes, whose inhabitants include beings who could be considered "true" gods: embodiments of fundamental concepts of reality, such as Chaos, Nature, Death, or Time; right up to the ultimate Creator of all things, at the crown of the Sephirothic Tree of Life. These are the makers and sustainers not just of Earth, but the entire Multiverse, who existed before any mortal beings, and have no need for our worship, or any interest in us beyond our use to their own cosmic purposes.

 

(All this is explained in the Champions source book, The Mystic World.)

Great.  So the gods of Ambrethel can be created through these "true gods", which all predate the creation of the world and the mortal beings in it.  The known gods of Ambrethel (Kilbern, etc.) are perhaps mediaries between the "true" gods and the world, so that they can be better understood by mortals.  And the "true gods" can change them, eliminate them, or create new ones, as needed - like every time there's a world-wide cataclysm.

[Lord Liaden]

1 hour ago, PhilFleischmann said:

To me, that would make them the *only* gods of the TA.  One of the essential, definitional aspects of a god is that it came before the world, or before mortals - and most likely created the world or created the mortals.  To say that mortals created the gods is bass-ackwards.  It completely disrupts my willful suspension of disbelief.  It ruins the immersive experience.  Sure, it's fine if you want to run a silly game - I enjoy silliness, too.  But if I'm playing in a "serious fantasy setting that's intended to feel as real as possible, then it shouldn't break the fourth wall and include modern-day, real-world memes in it.

 

And the priests of Thun still get their spells, don't they?  I can't think of any aspect of them that makes them not gods.  They are cosmically powerful beings that predate mankind, grant "divine" spells to worshippers, and have a consciousness and a will.  And they presumably had some involvement in making the world what it is today (even if they weren't involved in the initial creation).

 

See, that makes even less sense.  This little demonling, build on 25 points, with no name and no personality, exists because someone prayed it into existence?  Because someone had "faith" in it?  I'm reminded of the Monty Python sketch where they build apartment blocks by hypnosis - enjoy all the comforts of modern living, as long as you believe the building exists.  All I can think to say is, "On second thought, let's not go to Ambrethel.  It is a silly place."  Fortunately, one can still play games in this setting without including all this silliness.  And it will presumably play almost exactly the same.

 

Great.  So the gods of Ambrethel can be created through these "true gods", which all predate the creation of the world and the mortal beings in it.  The known gods of Ambrethel (Kilbern, etc.) are perhaps mediaries between the "true" gods and the world, so that they can be better understood by mortals.  And the "true gods" can change them, eliminate them, or create new ones, as needed - like every time there's a world-wide cataclysm.

 

Okay, last time I'll say this and I'm done: No, it makes sense. It's logical and internally consistent, given the premises of the world. For practical purposes it makes no difference to the people of Ambrethel, because they and their gods still interact the way one would expect them to, similarly to how gods and mortals have usually interacted with each other in legend. There's nothing inherently "silly" about that -- gods are still a big deal, and can greatly enrich your life or make it hell. You want "true" gods who created the world and don't need worship? They're there.

 

Nobody "prayed" imps into existence. People conceived of them, believed they're real -- just as people in the real world did -- except in this world that belief made them real. Same with elves, gorgons, oni, selkies, and everything else that human imagination populated our world with.

 

I get that this concept offends your sensibility of what is right and proper. It's not to your taste, and using it would make you uncomfortable. That's fair. But that doesn't make the concept inherently wrong, silly, or stupid.

 

There is one other point related to your suggestion that Ambrethel's gods act as intermediaries to the cosmic powers that might be useful to know: while that isn't any sort of formal arrangement, per The Mystic World it's not uncommon for those powers to effectively possess a god of similar qualities or habits, and use them as avatars to act on Earth. For example, Death will sometimes "ride" the death gods of various pantheons when it wants to take a more direct hand in mortal affairs. The Native American deity Coyote is normally a minor mischief-maker, but when possessed by The Trickster, embodiment of random, chaotic events, Coyote can transform the world.

 

EDIT: BTW, I'm sure you understand that if you did want to game in TA, you can just declare that the gods actually did create the world, and there's no connection to a wider Hero Universe. Of course then you'd have to explain the presence of other gods and other beliefs; but you'd have to do that if you patterned your setting after real Earth, as well.

[PhilFleischmann]

19 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

Okay, last time I'll say this and I'm done: No, it makes sense. It's logical and internally consistent, given the premises of the world.

Okay, last time I'll say this and I'm done:  It makes no sense.  It's illogical and inconsistent.

 

It does not "offend my sensibility of what is right and proper".  It doesn't make me "uncomfortable".  It only disrupts my willful suspension of disbelief.  It prevents me from feeling immersed in the setting.  It reminds me that I'm sitting at a table in the real world, in the 21st century, playing a game.  Rather than helping me to feel like I'm a heroic character in a fantasy world.  I never said it was inherently wrong.  But it does make it feel like the characters are all the butts of a practical joke.  That's not the kind of setting I want.

[Scott Ruggels]

5 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

  I never said it was inherently wrong.  But it does make it feel like the characters are all the butts of a practical joke.  That's not the kind of setting I want.

 

What? You don't want FUN is your game?!?!?!😁 

[Lord Liaden]

11 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

Okay, last time I'll say this and I'm done:  It makes no sense.  It's illogical and inconsistent.

 

It does not "offend my sensibility of what is right and proper".  It doesn't make me "uncomfortable".  It only disrupts my willful suspension of disbelief.  It prevents me from feeling immersed in the setting.  It reminds me that I'm sitting at a table in the real world, in the 21st century, playing a game.  Rather than helping me to feel like I'm a heroic character in a fantasy world.  I never said it was inherently wrong.  But it does make it feel like the characters are all the butts of a practical joke.  That's not the kind of setting I want.

 

All of which are solid reasons for not wanting to play in such a setting.

 

For my part, I actually find it much harder to suspend my disbelief in a world resembling those of myth, because then I have to ignore everything we now know about our universe. The world isn't a flat disc girdled by ocean, riding on the backs of elephants. The sun and moon aren't drawn by chariots across the sky; wolves aren't chasing them trying to eat them. The land of the dead isn't under the ground, and the stars aren't holes in a canopy. A dimension/plane/whatever which actually is like that would be an aberration, an insignificant little abscess in the infinitude of Reality; and the gods who created it as their vanity project, no more "divine" than superheroes or supervillains. If they tell their worshipers anything different, they're either ignorant fools or deliberately lying to them.

 

The Hero Universe at least fits closely enough to the real universe that I don't have to hang my disbelief by the neck until dead.

[DShomshak]

17 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

 One of the essential, definitional aspects of a god is that it came before the world, or before mortals - and most likely created the world or created the mortals. 

 

Factually incorrect. Chinese myth and religion includes many gods, who are worshiped as such, who are mortals ascended to divinity. AFAIK the only figure in Chinese myth that predates the world is the primordial giant Pangu, who grew to become the world. While I think* there are a few temples of Pangu, he's not a major figure in Chinese religion.

 

The main deities of Greek religion are born after the world's creation as well. There are a few primordial figures such as Gaia, but Zeus, Poseidon, Hera, Apollo, etc. live in a world they had no hand in making (beyond little things such as creating particular mountains or islands). The Greek creation myths that I know of are of fairly late provenance as well -- literary creations, such as Hesiod's Theogony, or philosophical speculations such as the Orphic myth. (See Robert Graves' The Greek Myths for a survey.)

 

Once you survey the breadth of human myth, religion and supernatural belief, you find that all the categories are blurry and any "rule" you imagine has plenty of exceptions and qualifiers. The most you can say is that some tropes and patterns frequently occur.

 

Dean Shomshak