What atheism looks like in pathfinder world?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 106 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

In the world that god is exist.

Do they will go to hell ?

Even if they are good people?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Veilgn wrote:

In the world that god is exist.

Do they will go to hell ?

Even if they are good people?

Given that the existence of gods -- note, plural -- can be confirmed, the kind of person in Golarion who didn't believe in gods like Torag and Sarenrae would be the kind of person that, in our world, didn't believe in the existence of Russia. Or of cabbages. In other words, they would literally be crazy/delusional.

"Hell" has a specific meaning in the Pathfinder cosmology; it's one of several destinations for souls after they die (primarily for the souls of lawful evil people). So if you were an atheist, but not lawful evil, you wouldn't go to "hell."


To me, an atheist in a Pathfinder world is someone who has no need to look to the gods for destiny, purpose or any other thing. The person would like view the gods as ultra-powerful beings, but not a "force of nature" or something outside the bounds of the physical laws of the universe.

Grand Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Champions of Balance wrote:
The Boneyard also houses the souls of atheists, save for those whose evil natures demand punishment. Atheists reside in the Graveyard of Souls on the Boneyard’s outskirts, left to wile away eternity without harassment from deities. Non-atheist souls uncommitted to any deity and free from evil may choose to enter the Realm of the Content, a land maintained by Pharasma where such souls are free to pursue their interests.
Faiths and Philosophies wrote:
On Golarion, “atheism” usually denotes the belief that those beings commonly called “gods” are not worthy of the authority and reverence bestowed upon them by others. Atheists rarely doubt the existence of deities, and generally acknowledge that deities are very powerful beings, but deem them no more than that. Instead of gods, they tend to revere ideals such as goodness or freedom, philosophies such as the Prophecies of Kalistrade or diabolism, or nothing in particular. Though some scholars argue that the term “atheist” is incorrectly applied to these people— preferring terms such as “dystheists” or “misotheists”— such distinctions are lost on a generally religious society, and most accept the more common term.


I've played lots of "atheists" in D&D style games with divine magic and actual tangible deities. The general perspective is not that beings called "gods" are unworthy of respect, they're just due the same respect as a king who has an army, or a man with a sword pointed at you, or a wizard who threatens to burn down your house is. They are to be respected because they are vastly powerful, but one generally tries to avoid the attention of vastly powerful beings.

The other key to it, I think, is to deny the primacy of a divinity's role in their portfolio. While the so-called "God of the Sea" can certainly control the wind and the waves, just like any powerful wizard could, if the "sea god" were to suddenly cease to exist there would still be wind and waves that proceed according to natural forces rather than the whim of the powerful.

Especially when you have gods that used to be humans (or elves, etc.) that aspect of their prior mortal existence can be used to deny that they are anything more than "incredibly powerful beings" but one does not worship their monarch or their landlord, so why would someone more powerful in the same role merit worship? For particularly intelligent characters prone to deep thinking on matters of ethics, you can also try to decouple the elemental notions of "good", "evil", "chaos", and "law" (i.e. those things that detect {foo} detects) from good and evil on a practical sense. To say that "Good" as exemplified by the "Gods of Good" is an elemental force (like electricity say) that these beings have harnessed, but its correlation with genuinely beneficial outcomes is largely accidental.

Radiant Oath

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Having just read Death's Heretic, Salim is a great example of the Golarion atheist, since he's from Rahadoum. He may work for Pharasma and fully understands who she is and how much power she has, but Salim doesn't respect her and never wastes an opportunity to take godly types to task about how unfair the system is and how messed up it is that they basically toy with mortals for what amounts to their amusement, at least as far as he's concerned. He knows it doesn't amount to much but empty complaining in the grand scheme of things, but it's the principle of the matter to him, that the gods unfairly take credit for mortal achievement and encourage complacency through faith. Furthermore, the few times he uses divine magic in the book are when there's no other option and he feels DISGUSTING when it's flowing through him.


You could definitely go with the classical definition of anarchist and have the atheist question and demand justification for the god's rule over humanity.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Atheism looks like Rahadoum. To deny the gods' authority and omniscience, and seek for men to be accountable to men.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

I've played lots of "atheists" in D&D style games with divine magic and actual tangible deities. The general perspective is not that beings called "gods" are unworthy of respect, they're just due the same respect as a king who has an army, or a man with a sword pointed at you, or a wizard who threatens to burn down your house is. They are to be respected because they are vastly powerful, but one generally tries to avoid the attention of vastly powerful beings.

The other key to it, I think, is to deny the primacy of a divinity's role in their portfolio. While the so-called "God of the Sea" can certainly control the wind and the waves, just like any powerful wizard could, if the "sea god" were to suddenly cease to exist there would still be wind and waves that proceed according to natural forces rather than the whim of the powerful.

Especially when you have gods that used to be humans (or elves, etc.) that aspect of their prior mortal existence can be used to deny that they are anything more than "incredibly powerful beings" but one does not worship their monarch or their landlord, so why would someone more powerful in the same role merit worship? For particularly intelligent characters prone to deep thinking on matters of ethics, you can also try to decouple the elemental notions of "good", "evil", "chaos", and "law" (i.e. those things that detect {foo} detects) from good and evil on a practical sense. To say that "Good" as exemplified by the "Gods of Good" is an elemental force (like electricity say) that these beings have harnessed, but its correlation with genuinely beneficial outcomes is largely accidental.

Or as Kahel put it during Skykey Solution regarding if everyone has CLW wands...

"Not that there's anything wrong with it, but I'd rather put my faith in preparation then the whims of some powerful being."

Or in a short story I'm writing about Kahel, when she meets Calistria the following exchange is made.

Quote:

“To what do I owe this dubious honor?” She asked of the goddess.

To her surprise the goddess laughed. “Oh my, it's not often I am scorned. Are you not worried I shall feel offended.”

“Should I be?” Kahel asked. “I mean, from what the texts say it's nearly impossible to know your motivations. But one common thread can be determined. Your reasons may be unknowable, but you are likely to either try seducing me or do something in vengeance for who knows what slight you are angry about. And it's not as if I could escape from you in either case. Now again, why are you bothering me?”


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Veilgn wrote:

In the world that god is exist.

Do they will go to hell ?

Even if they are good people?

They hang out in the boneyard. Occasionally atheist souls are fed to the moon to stop the moon from destroying everything.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The flaw with Salim's argument is that the gods are actually severely restricted from toying with mortals by the contract of creation. They can't just go down, dominate a million people and force them to attack a city they don't like. They need to have followers that would be willing and able to do so. Those followers have as much free will as anyone else, even if they're outsiders. I could agree that the way souls are eventually stripped of their memories and warped into outsiders or pieces of the planes themselves is horrific and not very fair, but no one makes that decision. It's just how the world works. Pharasma is one of the 'force of nature' deities. She has existed since life and death have. Much like Gozreh, she is a function of the universe rather than another creature within it. Is it 'unfair' that gravity pulls you back to the ground when you jump? Who gave it the right to decide that?

And I've never seen a deity take credit for mortal achievement unless it was their own followers accomplishing those things directly through the deity's power... which means it pretty much wasn't mortal achievement.

Basically, Salim is just a stupidly stubborn individualist from a country founded on an overreaction. "That religious war was pretty horrible. To promote peace, self-discipline and family loyalty, let's ban the worship of all gods, including ones that promote peace, self-discipline and family loyalty."


Note that Pathfinder =/= Golarion. Not sure which the OP was asking about.

In another universe the gods might be a more subtle presence, in which case true atheism would be possible even for the sane.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

"Of course they exist, but that's no reason to go believin' in them." - Nanny Ogg (probably misquoted)


As for going to Hell, that's what comes of worshipping Evil deities, specifically Lawful Evil ones. Chaotic Evil would lead to the Abyss. There are multiple "hells" and multiple "heavens", some might even insist that one was the other.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
johnlocke90 wrote:
Veilgn wrote:

In the world that god is exist.

Do they will go to hell ?

Even if they are good people?

They hang out in the boneyard. Occasionally atheist souls are fed to the moon to stop the moon from destroying everything.

Thats cruel.

Radiant Oath

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
DominusMegadeus wrote:
The flaw with Salim's argument is that the gods are actually severely restricted from toying with mortals by the contract of creation. They can't just go down, dominate a million people and force them to attack a city they don't like. They need to have followers that would be willing and able to do so. Those followers have as much free will as anyone else, even if they're outsiders. I could agree that the way souls are eventually stripped of their memories and warped into outsiders or pieces of the planes themselves is horrific and not very fair, but no one makes that decision. It's just how the world works. Pharasma is one of the 'force of nature' deities. She has existed since life and death have. Much like Gozreh, she is a function of the universe rather than another creature within it. Is it 'unfair' that gravity pulls you back to the ground when you jump? Who gave it the right to decide that?

Yet at the same time, the gods DO exercise their power in the lives of individual mortals to suit their purposes, and THAT'S what Salim takes issue with, believing that such actions are inherently wrong.

Death's Heretic Spoilers!:
What got Salim into Pharasma's service was a miracle she granted to him to bring his murdered wife back, and while Salim was initially happy, both he and his wife basically came to the conclusion that what he'd done was HORRIBLY wrong, that Pharasma had basically perverted the natural order she's supposed to enforce just because Salim said "please" really really hard, and wasn't even really talking to her. And near the end of the novel, Shyka the Many, one of the fey Eldest, offers to rewind time for him back to his wife's murder to undo his "prayer," and Salim is DEEPLY offended at Shyka's offer:
Death's Heretic, Page 349 wrote:

"Salim," Shyka said soothingly, a little affronted, "I assure you that I truly have the power to-"

"You always do," Salim spat. "Your kind has the power, so you use it, playing with those less powerful for your own amusement. Gods, Eldest-it doesn't matter." He squeezed tighter, fingers digging into Shyka's arm hard enough to turn brown skin pale. "I made the mistake once of trying to undo what had already been done. It cost me my honor, my wife, and my soul. I won't make it again."

To Salim and Rahadoum as a whole, the idea that these super-powerful beings can come down and mess with the natural order when they feel like it, especially at the whims of those whose faith makes them unstable and violent (as far as Rahadoum is concerned), is abusive in the extreme.

Quote:
And I've never seen a deity take credit for mortal achievement unless it was their own followers accomplishing those things directly through the deity's power... which means it pretty much wasn't mortal achievement.

Fair enough, that was me misremembering a passage from the book which was more along the lines of "Reason is better than faith and is the most important thing we as people have and we should never abandon let our hatred of priests and gods become its own faith, because then we're just as bad as them."

Quote:
Basically, Salim is just a stupidly stubborn individualist from a country founded on an overreaction. "That religious war was pretty horrible. To promote peace, self-discipline and family loyalty, let's ban the worship of all gods, including ones that promote peace, self-discipline and family loyalty."

This is true, I'm merely saying that he's illustrative of that mindset, and like I said, it ultimately amounts to empty complaining as he still does the jobs Pharasma gives him, and any gripe I've seen him make towards divine figures in the books is almost always brushed off.


Disregarding the quote from Champions of Balance that TriOmegaZero posted, I would think that your afterlife would be determined by your actions and alignment regardless of whether you actively worshiped a deity in life. I got the impression that Pharasma judges fairly, and cramming any non-worshiper Petitioner into some house in the Boneyard to feed to the Majora's Mask moon every now and then doesn't strike me as fair.

Radiant Oath

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

From what I understand, the whole "Pharasma feeds the souls of atheists to Groetus to keep the world from ending" isn't canon. I believe in the Ask James Jacobs thread he stated that there was a lot of lore in the adventure that tidbit comes from (Beyond the Vault of Souls) that's kind of Early Installment Weirdness for Pathfinder, before the Setting and its metaphysics really began to take shape, and that, like the whole "Erastil is misogynistic" thing, is a misinterpretation that's been repeated enough by different writers that it stuck.


is this with everyone being an atheist or with just some people being an atheist? if every one in the setting is an atheist then there would be no druids,clerics,paladins, anti paladins, rangers, witches, shamans, oracles or any other class that relies on a deity to function. on the other hand if it were just some people then they would be viewed as insane or even hunted down by every one else just like how they were in ancient times in some places on earth.


Lady-J wrote:
is this with everyone being an atheist or with just some people being an atheist? if every one in the setting is an atheist then there would be no druids,clerics,paladins, anti paladins, rangers, witches, shamans, oracles or any other class that relies on a deity to function. on the other hand if it were just some people then they would be viewed as insane or even hunted down by every one else just like how they were in ancient times in some places on earth.

Actually, Druids, Rangers, Witches, Shamans, and Oracles don't require worshiping a deity to function.

Dark Archive

Being an atheist in Pathfinder does allow access to certain useful feats like Godless Healing. The exact beliefs of your atheist may vary. Kahel knows of the gods, but would rather put faith in skill and preparation. Someone else might reject the gods because they feel the gods rejected them.


Bloodrealm wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
is this with everyone being an atheist or with just some people being an atheist? if every one in the setting is an atheist then there would be no druids,clerics,paladins, anti paladins, rangers, witches, shamans, oracles or any other class that relies on a deity to function. on the other hand if it were just some people then they would be viewed as insane or even hunted down by every one else just like how they were in ancient times in some places on earth.
Actually, Druids, Rangers, Witches, Shamans, and Oracles don't require worshiping a deity to function.

Technically in Pathfinder neither do paladins or clerics, though in Golarion all clerics have a deity.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
DominusMegadeus wrote:


Basically, Salim is just a stupidly stubborn individualist from a country founded on an overreaction. "That religious war was pretty horrible. To promote peace, self-discipline and family loyalty, let's ban the worship of all gods, including ones that promote peace, self-discipline and family loyalty."

Keep in mind that the Oath Wars that tore Salim's country a part had as one of the principals, the followers of the goddess of good, and redemption. It's easy to comdemm from an armchair in a setting where you don't have personal experience on how vicious wars on religion can be. If you grew up in the Gaza Strip, though, I guarantee you'd have a vastly different outlook on the subject. If I grew up living Selim's life, I'd happy be burning Sarenrae's holy symbols and texts as well. And keep in mind that Sarenrae HAS in the past burned whole cities in revenge for a slight on her, and those acts came back to bite her.

What complicates the real world example is tht the wars on the Mid East have external powers that have for centuries, used the region as their personal chessboard.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Murder the gods and topple their thrones.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
DominusMegadeus wrote:


Basically, Salim is just a stupidly stubborn individualist from a country founded on an overreaction. "That religious war was pretty horrible. To promote peace, self-discipline and family loyalty, let's ban the worship of all gods, including ones that promote peace, self-discipline and family loyalty."

Keep in mind that the Oath Wars that tore Salim's country a part had as one of the principals, the followers of the goddess of good, and redemption. It's easy to comdemm from an armchair in a setting where you don't have personal experience on how vicious wars on religion can be. If you grew up in the Gaza Strip, though, I guarantee you'd have a vastly different outlook on the subject. If I grew up living Selim's life, I'd happy be burning Sarenrae's holy symbols and texts as well. And keep in mind that Sarenrae HAS in the past burned whole cities in revenge for a slight on her, and those acts came back to bite her.

Indeedy do. If Sarenrae doesn't take away power from followers who actively use it to spread death and slavery, then I don't see it as an overreaction to assume other Gods are equally lax in actually supporting their 'ideals'.

I mean, Sarenrae would be my favorite God in Pathfinder, but The Cult of the Dawnflower enrages me. Eager to attack Taldor, knowing that the people will be enslaved, and they'll do it in Sarenrae's name. Trying to play a follower of Sarenrae, but balancing it with that fact, is just too much. Just being anywhere near Qadira makes me want to start killing people.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xerres wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
DominusMegadeus wrote:


Basically, Salim is just a stupidly stubborn individualist from a country founded on an overreaction. "That religious war was pretty horrible. To promote peace, self-discipline and family loyalty, let's ban the worship of all gods, including ones that promote peace, self-discipline and family loyalty."

Keep in mind that the Oath Wars that tore Salim's country a part had as one of the principals, the followers of the goddess of good, and redemption. It's easy to comdemm from an armchair in a setting where you don't have personal experience on how vicious wars on religion can be. If you grew up in the Gaza Strip, though, I guarantee you'd have a vastly different outlook on the subject. If I grew up living Selim's life, I'd happy be burning Sarenrae's holy symbols and texts as well. And keep in mind that Sarenrae HAS in the past burned whole cities in revenge for a slight on her, and those acts came back to bite her.

Indeedy do. If Sarenrae doesn't take away power from followers who actively use it to spread death and slavery, then I don't see it as an overreaction to assume other Gods are equally lax in actually supporting their 'ideals'.

I mean, Sarenrae would be my favorite God in Pathfinder, but The Cult of the Dawnflower enrages me. Eager to attack Taldor, knowing that the people will be enslaved, and they'll do it in Sarenrae's name. Trying to play a follower of Sarenrae, but balancing it with that fact, is just too much. Just being anywhere near Qadira makes me want to start killing people.

Taldor systematically enslaves people. It creates slavery and purged Sarenrae's followers. So attacking them doesn't cause more enslavement than Taldor already has.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
DominusMegadeus wrote:


Basically, Salim is just a stupidly stubborn individualist from a country founded on an overreaction. "That religious war was pretty horrible. To promote peace, self-discipline and family loyalty, let's ban the worship of all gods, including ones that promote peace, self-discipline and family loyalty."

Keep in mind that the Oath Wars that tore Salim's country a part had as one of the principals, the followers of the goddess of good, and redemption. It's easy to comdemm from an armchair in a setting where you don't have personal experience on how vicious wars on religion can be. If you grew up in the Gaza Strip, though, I guarantee you'd have a vastly different outlook on the subject. If I grew up living Selim's life, I'd happy be burning Sarenrae's holy symbols and texts as well. And keep in mind that Sarenrae HAS in the past burned whole cities in revenge for a slight on her, and those acts came back to bite her.

What complicates the real world example is tht the wars on the Mid East have external powers that have for centuries, used the region as their personal chessboard.

On the one hand, it seems that some of the non-Evil Golarion deities have significantly better attitudes towards mortals than you find in the description of deities in 1st Edition Deities & Demigods, or for that matter on Earth. On the other hand, it seems that Sarenrae actually doesn't do a very good job of redemption . . . .


HWalsh wrote:
Xerres wrote:

Indeedy do. If Sarenrae doesn't take away power from followers who actively use it to spread death and slavery, then I don't see it as an overreaction to assume other Gods are equally lax in actually supporting their 'ideals'.

I mean, Sarenrae would be my favorite God in Pathfinder, but The Cult of the Dawnflower enrages me. Eager to attack Taldor, knowing that the people will be enslaved, and they'll do it in Sarenrae's name. Trying to play a follower of Sarenrae, but balancing it with that fact, is just too much. Just being anywhere near Qadira makes me want to start killing people.

Taldor systematically enslaves people. It creates slavery and purged Sarenrae's followers. So attacking them doesn't cause more enslavement than Taldor already has.

So instead of fighting the idea of slavery, they just want to spread their version. Because that's what Sarenrae empowers them to do.

"Hey, Taldor has a terrible institution of slavery. Lets attack them."

"And get rid of slavery?"

"Nah, that's too hard. Lets just make sure we're the ones enslaving them. That's good enough."

*Sarenrae gives a thumbs up and supplies divine power to fund this new war.*

It infuriates me.


Xerres wrote:
HWalsh wrote:
Xerres wrote:

Indeedy do. If Sarenrae doesn't take away power from followers who actively use it to spread death and slavery, then I don't see it as an overreaction to assume other Gods are equally lax in actually supporting their 'ideals'.

I mean, Sarenrae would be my favorite God in Pathfinder, but The Cult of the Dawnflower enrages me. Eager to attack Taldor, knowing that the people will be enslaved, and they'll do it in Sarenrae's name. Trying to play a follower of Sarenrae, but balancing it with that fact, is just too much. Just being anywhere near Qadira makes me want to start killing people.

Taldor systematically enslaves people. It creates slavery and purged Sarenrae's followers. So attacking them doesn't cause more enslavement than Taldor already has.

So instead of fighting the idea of slavery, they just want to spread their version. Because that's what Sarenrae empowers them to do.

"Hey, Taldor has a terrible institution of slavery. Lets attack them."

"And get rid of slavery?"

"Nah, that's too hard. Lets just make sure we're the ones enslaving them. That's good enough."

*Sarenrae gives a thumbs up and supplies divine power to fund this new war.*

It infuriates me.

Taldor slaughtered Sarenrae's followers. You do realize Sarenrae's a God right? Angry Gods don't let that kind of thing slide.

Gods are not nice people when wronged. Iomedae permanently cripples people for mocking her, to use one book example.

It's called divine punishment or just simply karma.

They enslaved people and slaughtered the followers of a God who grants freedom. It's only fitting that they be punished for their insolence to a Divine Being that they are enslaved themselves.


HWalsh wrote:
Xerres wrote:

So instead of fighting the idea of slavery, they just want to spread their version. Because that's what Sarenrae empowers them to do.

"Hey, Taldor has a terrible institution of slavery. Lets attack them."

"And get rid of slavery?"

"Nah, that's too hard. Lets just make sure we're the ones enslaving them. That's good enough."

*Sarenrae gives a thumbs up and supplies divine power to fund this new war.*

It infuriates me.

Taldor slaughtered Sarenrae's followers. You do realize Sarenrae's a God right? Angry Gods don't let that kind of thing slide.

Gods are not nice people when wronged. Iomedae permanently cripples people for mocking her, to use one book example.

It's called divine punishment or just simply karma.

They enslaved people and slaughtered the followers of a God who grants freedom. It's only fitting that they be punished for their insolence to a Divine Being that they are enslaved themselves.

We're talking about the Goddess of Healing and Redemption, right? I think that's the one we're talking about. The one that's supposed to have incredible patience, that wants to redeem even Evil deities that have committed atrocities that completely eclipse anything a mortal could even conceive? I'm pretty sure that's the Goddess we're talking about.

Apparently, that healing, redemption, and patience just flies out the window when you're a mortal being and there's a chance to sell you into slavery for the rest of your life. She'll instruct her followers to attack and enslave people that offend her personally, but to free innocents from their bondage? Oh no, that's too much to ask. She'll start a war to CREATE slaves, but she won't start a war to FREE them.

But hey, she PREACHES healing and redemption! She just doesn't ask her followers to actually PRACTICE that. Can't blame her, that would be difficult, and I doubt there's much profit in it. Going by what the Empire that claims her as a patron believes, Sarenrae is the Goddess of Human Trafficking.

But I will say its a great example of just why you have atheists in Golarion. Sarenrae's followers preach her as a loving force that believes in Healing and Redemption, and then they enslave you and sell you to Jabba because you look real good in that metal bikini. And you deserve it, because the people that have total control of your life screwed up and Sarenrae is a Goddess that doesn't have time to help the innocent.

Silver Crusade

Just to point out that is in no way the majority of her followers that do that, it's just the Cult of the Dawnflower.

Notice the "CULT" part tacked on to the beginning of that.


Rysky wrote:

Just to point out that is in no way the majority of her followers that do that, it's just the Cult of the Dawnflower.

Notice the "CULT" part tacked on to the beginning of that.

Very true, but as I noted above, the existence of the Cult of the Dawnflower, that Sarenrae will give them the power to do that to begin with, is why I can't bring myself to play a follower of hers.

And I think its an excellent example of why atheists would exist in Golarion. The Goddess of Healing and Redemption empowers people that will sell you into slavery. Why should you believe in anything her Church tells you, she could change her mind and decide she's kind of annoyed and now her morals allow for you to suffer.

Just to note, I've only played one character that could be considered an atheist, and he was an amnesiac that didn't remember his own name. Every other character has worshiped one of the Gods. And Sarenrae would be the top of my list, if she wasn't supporting the system of slavery.

Silver Crusade

Xerres wrote:
Rysky wrote:

Just to point out that is in no way the majority of her followers that do that, it's just the Cult of the Dawnflower.

Notice the "CULT" part tacked on to the beginning of that.

Very true, but as I noted above, the existence of the Cult of the Dawnflower, that Sarenrae will give them the power to do that to begin with, is why I can't bring myself to play a follower of hers.

And I think its an excellent example of why atheists would exist in Golarion. The Goddess of Healing and Redemption empowers people that will sell you into slavery. Why should you believe in anything her Church tells you, she could change her mind and decide she's kind of annoyed and now her morals allow for you to suffer.

Just to note, I've only played one character that could be considered an atheist, and he was an amnesiac that didn't remember his own name. Every other character has worshiped one of the Gods. And Sarenrae would be the top of my list, if she wasn't supporting the system of slavery.

She doesn't support slavery, but the fact of the matter is that back when she was smite happy led to bad things happening so now she's on the opposite end of the spectrum, giving people too many chances for redemption. As a goddess of Redemption that's one of her flaws.

Also note that a mass revoking of all the CotD worshiper's powers (for those who haven't actually lost them yet) would be catastrophic for the areas they're in. Not just a simple "oh well, moving on."

And lastly conflict makes for good stories, and the schism in Sarenrae's faith and their opposition to Taldor has been building towards an AP for awhile, something the Developers have also hinted at.


Rysky wrote:

She doesn't support slavery, but the fact of the matter is that back when she was smite happy led to bad things happening so now she's on the opposite end of the spectrum, giving people too many chances for redemption. As a goddess of Redemption that's one of her flaws.

Also note that a mass revoking of all the CotD worshiper's powers (for those who haven't actually lost them yet) would be catastrophic for the areas they're in. Not just a simple "oh well, moving on."

And lastly conflict makes for good stories, and the schism in Sarenrae's faith and their opposition to Taldor has been building towards an AP for awhile, something the Developers have also hinted at.

When I first got into Golarion I wanted to make a follower of Sarenrae, a Paladin. But then I read about Qadira, and the city of Sedeq. That she's the Patron Goddess of the largest slave empire in the world.

Now I can accept the idea that her Church doesn't oppose the Padishah Empire, because they'd lose. The Empire would stop following Sarenrae's teachings at all, and things would likely get worse for the people. Okay. What I could not accept, in trying to make a follower of hers, was that she would then empower people that she knows are spreading this Empire of slavery, and taking more people in to this institution.

Not opposing it? Okay, I don't like it, but that's not supporting it.
Actively blessing people with divine power, when you know they will use it to help enslave others? That is supporting it.

I get the reasons why the developers wrote it that way, but the actions and in-actions of Sarenrae's church are infuriating to me.

Silver Crusade Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

They're working on it.

hides thread

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Read the post and damn that's a cop out, nice people don't build empires. Sure, in real life where nice people don't get literally Divine power to accomplish their goalw and the ability to smite evil. It strikes me as another example of fantasy authors falling back on real life without thinking through the ramifications.


Honestly, I prefer my gods to be flawed, but I also don't have alignment. So there are no good gods or evil gods. I like having flawed, distant gods that give powers to those that believe in them, with little regard for whether they are good or evil. That way it opens up stories of corruption in the church that you normally couldn't have in standard D&D. And it leaves the redemption and reformation of said church in the hands of the players, which one did. Had a cleric of Ahmuzencab (homebrew goddess of healing and community) that fought against her church's hierarchy that would conveniently imprison those that threatened their rule under the guise of protecting the community. She saved the political prisoners and caused great reform with the church, leading it back to its more altruistic roots.

That's a story I can't really have with gods the way they are. I'm actually okay with the schism in Sarenrae doctrine and would run it as is.

Acquisitives

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Xerres wrote:
Rysky wrote:

She doesn't support slavery, but the fact of the matter is that back when she was smite happy led to bad things happening so now she's on the opposite end of the spectrum, giving people too many chances for redemption. As a goddess of Redemption that's one of her flaws.

Also note that a mass revoking of all the CotD worshiper's powers (for those who haven't actually lost them yet) would be catastrophic for the areas they're in. Not just a simple "oh well, moving on."

And lastly conflict makes for good stories, and the schism in Sarenrae's faith and their opposition to Taldor has been building towards an AP for awhile, something the Developers have also hinted at.

When I first got into Golarion I wanted to make a follower of Sarenrae, a Paladin. But then I read about Qadira, and the city of Sedeq. That she's the Patron Goddess of the largest slave empire in the world.

Now I can accept the idea that her Church doesn't oppose the Padishah Empire, because they'd lose. The Empire would stop following Sarenrae's teachings at all, and things would likely get worse for the people. Okay. What I could not accept, in trying to make a follower of hers, was that she would then empower people that she knows are spreading this Empire of slavery, and taking more people in to this institution.

Not opposing it? Okay, I don't like it, but that's not supporting it.
Actively blessing people with divine power, when you know they will use it to help enslave others? That is supporting it.

I get the reasons why the developers wrote it that way, but the actions and in-actions of Sarenrae's church are infuriating to me.

there's no reason why hypocrisy can't exist in fantasy land...


Yakman wrote:
Xerres wrote:
Rysky wrote:

She doesn't support slavery, but the fact of the matter is that back when she was smite happy led to bad things happening so now she's on the opposite end of the spectrum, giving people too many chances for redemption. As a goddess of Redemption that's one of her flaws.

Also note that a mass revoking of all the CotD worshiper's powers (for those who haven't actually lost them yet) would be catastrophic for the areas they're in. Not just a simple "oh well, moving on."

And lastly conflict makes for good stories, and the schism in Sarenrae's faith and their opposition to Taldor has been building towards an AP for awhile, something the Developers have also hinted at.

When I first got into Golarion I wanted to make a follower of Sarenrae, a Paladin. But then I read about Qadira, and the city of Sedeq. That she's the Patron Goddess of the largest slave empire in the world.

Now I can accept the idea that her Church doesn't oppose the Padishah Empire, because they'd lose. The Empire would stop following Sarenrae's teachings at all, and things would likely get worse for the people. Okay. What I could not accept, in trying to make a follower of hers, was that she would then empower people that she knows are spreading this Empire of slavery, and taking more people in to this institution.

Not opposing it? Okay, I don't like it, but that's not supporting it.
Actively blessing people with divine power, when you know they will use it to help enslave others? That is supporting it.

I get the reasons why the developers wrote it that way, but the actions and in-actions of Sarenrae's church are infuriating to me.

there's no reason why hypocrisy can't exist in fantasy land...

Yeah. Honestly, it's a conflict of the status quo that's ripe for a player to come in as a reformist cleric and change the church. If I were a GM and a player expressed issues with their god and church, I'd tell them that they can attempt to adventure and change it. Makes it much more exciting and rewarding when they enact a huge change to a game world like that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Veilgn wrote:

In the world that god is exist.

Do they will go to hell ?

Even if they are good people?

First of all... Hell... *sigh*. PF cosmology isn't some extremist christian sect that thinks that the vast majority of non-believers are damned to eternal torment, simply for being born in a place where Christianity isn't predominant.

In many aspects, it isn't a "I will go to whatever god I pray to when I die either". Someone who makes a prayer to Seranae every day before he tortures a prisonner to death (and enjoys it even when he knows his victims are innocent) likely won't be going to her when he dies.

Now, secondly, no proof is irrefutable. We have flat earthers... We have creationnists... we have climate change refuters... we have a large number of people in the real world believing a number of wild stories despite all scientific proof to the contrary.

Which brings to the question of what one qualifies as "atheism". Is it the rejection of the gods, or their disbelief in them? If the former, one could believe the gods exist, without thinking they are worthy of worship. If it's the latter, it seems plausible that exposure to the work of the gods would be extremely variable in a world. Many farmers probably never even see divine magic. They would possibly be skeptical of any accounts of it. Then there'd be people that have been exposed to it, but still don't believe in it. Maybe it's magic tricks, in the mundane sense. Snake oil, placebo effect, self-fulfiling prophecies, coincidences, etc. Many people believe fortune tellers can see into the future, many people believe they are just really talented at saying generic claims and extracting information for their clients to simply make up believable and easy to complete events, something similar could apply. And finally, you could then have people who full exposure to divine magic, and still disbelieve in gods. Maybe those clerics are being tricked by demons? It could be the result of non-divine cosmic powers that divine casters tap into without proper knowledge of what they are doing. After all, a cleric can work just as well without praying to any actual god: isn't this proof in itself that gods don't grant magic? To some people, it is likely to be.

In the end, just tell yourself that whatever crazy ideology you can think of, odds are real people, in some point in time and some place in the world, actually believed in something weirder.


Odraude wrote:
Yakman wrote:
there's no reason why hypocrisy can't exist in fantasy land...
Yeah. Honestly, it's a conflict of the status quo that's ripe for a player to come in as a reformist cleric and change the church. If I were a GM and a player expressed issues with their god and church, I'd tell them that they can attempt to adventure and change it. Makes it much more exciting and rewarding when they enact a huge change to a game world like that.

I never said hypocrisy can't exist, I understand why the developers wrote things that way. It just makes me angry.

I guess I could try to be a reformist, but when I read: "The settlement of Sedeq, south of the Zho Mountains, is a place of warm breezes, lush gardens, and frequent desperate pleas and screams, for it the heart of the Qadiran slave trade. There, captured slaves are broken, shorn, and made ready for sale."

I kind of just lose any and all interest in following a Goddess that patrons the Empire that runs this. And gives divine power to people that want to start a war to spread that, instead of end it. It just ruffles my feathers and makes me want to start stabbing people when I get anywhere near Qadira.

Project Manager

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Balancer wrote:
Read the post and damn that's a cop out, nice people don't build empires. Sure, in real life where nice people don't get literally Divine power to accomplish their goalw and the ability to smite evil. It strikes me as another example of fantasy authors falling back on real life without thinking through the ramifications.

My comment that "nice people don't build empires," wasn't a "cop-out" or a justification for Qadiran slavery: it was a description of the conceptual difficulty of figuring out how an empire with a NG state deity functions. It was pointing out a challenge created by what I think was a fairly shallowly considered decision back in the day to try to make good deities interesting by giving them flaws (in a game where alignment is a central mechanic), which--like most "let's be edgy!!!" decisions made off the cuff early in an IP's life--creates headaches down the road when you need to flesh out your worldbuilding.

So please don't misrepresent what I said.

Project Manager

5 people marked this as a favorite.

As for slavery and Sarenism, I don't believe we've said anywhere that there are Sarenite clerics who are slavers. In terms of real-world ethics, I would say that to be good, Sarenite clerics couldn't passively stand by in the face of slavery, and would have to attempt to ensure that no adherents to their religion practiced it. But I also think the alignment system in D&D/Pathfinder is useless in terms of resolving actual ethical questions. It's an attempt by game designers who weren't exactly deep-thinking ethicists to cram something complicated and nuanced into a simple system.

We've created a world in which you can have good clerics who can stand by while something evil happens and not lose the G in their alignment. I understand why it needs to be that way for the game world to function. I don't particularly like it, but I don't see a way to change it without upending a decade of canon.

In terms of PFRPG alignment, there's a difference between the Sarenite Church tolerating slavery versus supporting it. And Sedeq is an outlier in Qadiran culture, not representative of it.

As for the Cult of the Dawnflower, there's more to it than aggression, and while I think the movement's misguided, that doesn't necessarily prevent good-aligned people from being part of it, either because they agree with parts of it or because they want to reform it. Essentially, the Cult of the Dawnflower is a lot like early Protestantism, in that it's something that's injecting life and energy into a religion that's fairly staid at this point in its history. Unfortunately, unlike early Protestantism, it arose out of a country that believes its neighbors are going to wipe it out and that its parent empire's complacency is going to get it destroyed, so it immediately got tied in with militaristic nationalism and aggression.

That said, there's no reason why a good cleric couldn't be attracted to it out of disillusionment with the mainline Sarenite Church, either because they think that its virtues are important in spite of its flaws, or because they believe they can reform it.

Quixotic? Certainly. But I don't think we've ever said that having unrealistic goals is enough to get you booted out of the G section of the grid.


Jessica Price wrote:
Xerres wrote:
Read the post and damn that's a cop out, nice people don't build empires. Sure, in real life where nice people don't get literally Divine power to accomplish their goalw and the ability to smite evil. It strikes me as another example of fantasy authors falling back on real life without thinking through the ramifications.

My comment that "nice people don't build empires," wasn't a "cop-out" or a justification for Qadiran slavery: it was a description of the conceptual difficulty of figuring out how an empire with a NG state deity functions. It was pointing out a challenge created by what I think was a fairly shallowly considered decision back in the day to try to make good deities interesting by giving them flaws (in a game where alignment is a central mechanic), which--like most "let's be edgy!!!" decisions made off the cuff early in an IP's life--creates headaches down the road when you need to flesh out your worldbuilding.

So please don't misrepresent what I said.

Not sure why, but the quote says that I said that, when it was Balancer. Please don't misrepresent what I said. :)

But I'm sure its hard trying to justify the odd choices made early on in development. And slavery is a real sticky one to get wrapped up with. You either make it seem not so bad, in which case you're just wrong. Or you make it as horrible as it is, and then you get people that reject the kind, benevolent Goddess of Healing because someone wrote her into a corner and even a God can't fight the author.

Project Manager

Xerres wrote:
Jessica Price wrote:
Xerres wrote:
Read the post and damn that's a cop out, nice people don't build empires. Sure, in real life where nice people don't get literally Divine power to accomplish their goalw and the ability to smite evil. It strikes me as another example of fantasy authors falling back on real life without thinking through the ramifications.

My comment that "nice people don't build empires," wasn't a "cop-out" or a justification for Qadiran slavery: it was a description of the conceptual difficulty of figuring out how an empire with a NG state deity functions. It was pointing out a challenge created by what I think was a fairly shallowly considered decision back in the day to try to make good deities interesting by giving them flaws (in a game where alignment is a central mechanic), which--like most "let's be edgy!!!" decisions made off the cuff early in an IP's life--creates headaches down the road when you need to flesh out your worldbuilding.

So please don't misrepresent what I said.

Not sure why, but the quote says that I said that, when it was Balancer. Please don't misrepresent what I said. :)

But I'm sure its hard trying to justify the odd choices made early on in development. And slavery is a real sticky one to get wrapped up with. You either make it seem not so bad, in which case you're just wrong. Or you make it as horrible as it is, and then you get people that reject the kind, benevolent Goddess of Healing because someone wrote her into a corner and even a God can't fight the author.

Weird. I started replying to a post of yours and then clicked "reply" to Balancer. Maybe I should have refreshed the page or something. Sorry! Should be fixed now.

Acquisitives

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Odraude wrote:
Yakman wrote:
Xerres wrote:
Rysky wrote:

She doesn't support slavery, but the fact of the matter is that back when she was smite happy led to bad things happening so now she's on the opposite end of the spectrum, giving people too many chances for redemption. As a goddess of Redemption that's one of her flaws.

Also note that a mass revoking of all the CotD worshiper's powers (for those who haven't actually lost them yet) would be catastrophic for the areas they're in. Not just a simple "oh well, moving on."

And lastly conflict makes for good stories, and the schism in Sarenrae's faith and their opposition to Taldor has been building towards an AP for awhile, something the Developers have also hinted at.

When I first got into Golarion I wanted to make a follower of Sarenrae, a Paladin. But then I read about Qadira, and the city of Sedeq. That she's the Patron Goddess of the largest slave empire in the world.

Now I can accept the idea that her Church doesn't oppose the Padishah Empire, because they'd lose. The Empire would stop following Sarenrae's teachings at all, and things would likely get worse for the people. Okay. What I could not accept, in trying to make a follower of hers, was that she would then empower people that she knows are spreading this Empire of slavery, and taking more people in to this institution.

Not opposing it? Okay, I don't like it, but that's not supporting it.
Actively blessing people with divine power, when you know they will use it to help enslave others? That is supporting it.

I get the reasons why the developers wrote it that way, but the actions and in-actions of Sarenrae's church are infuriating to me.

there's no reason why hypocrisy can't exist in fantasy land...
Yeah. Honestly, it's a conflict of the status quo that's ripe for a player to come in as a reformist cleric and change the church. If I were a GM and a player expressed issues with their god and church, I'd tell them that they can attempt to adventure and...

Yes, the Sarenaite should be changed.

Should learn some lessons from those nice fellas in Nidal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you stick to the strict definition of "atheism," I'd have a hard time accepting anyone could actually be an atheist in Golarion. Atheism means that a person doesn't believe in the existence of a god or gods.

Now, an antitheist would be very possible. Antitheism is more complicated and nuanced, but in general they opposed religions in general. Some might believe that a god or gods exist, but that they are not worthy of worship. Others merely oppose organized churches of a god or gods.


Saldiven wrote:

If you stick to the strict definition of "atheism," I'd have a hard time accepting anyone could actually be an atheist in Golarion. Atheism means that a person doesn't believe in the existence of a god or gods.

Now, an antitheist would be very possible. Antitheism is more complicated and nuanced, but in general they opposed religions in general. Some might believe that a god or gods exist, but that they are not worthy of worship. Others merely oppose organized churches of a god or gods.

Something that's been pointed out in a previous thread, magic is not necessarily divine. A cleric can heal you, but so can a bard. We know the bard doesn't need a god to do so, why should the cleric?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Saldiven wrote:
If you stick to the strict definition of "atheism," I'd have a hard time accepting anyone could actually be an atheist in Golarion. Atheism means that a person doesn't believe in the existence of a god or gods.

You could deny that the 'gods' are actually deities and just powerful outsiders, but that is semantics for the most part.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

there are no gods, clerics are just deluded wizards in disguise

1 to 50 of 106 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What atheism looks like in pathfinder world? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.