|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
A god requires followers is known and understood universally. The why is sometimes vague so a friend of mine and I sat down and had a theological/philosophical discussion. Here is the result.
Gods pull from a power pool of some kind; this allows them to grant divine magic, perform miracles, and manifest avatars among other things. Where does this power come from? Obviously worship. But that takes so many forms.
A good god has a lot of followers and seems to gather this energy from them performing tasks in their name. Sometimes this takes the form of alms, prayers or other offerings. A good god will have a large church, giving this power in large numbers, or fanatics performing feats in the gods name from waging war to protecting and sheltering the innocent who then revere the god. An evil god generally has fewer followers, thus requires sacrifice among other forms of piety to unleash this energy. A "dead" god has no worshipers, thus no power.
A priest or a paladin is another matter. The god actually invests a fragment of itself into either the devotee or into the holy symbol, requiring it to be present to manifest the power of the gods. Think of the holy symbol almost like a conduit to the god. They can see, hear and experience the divine casters experiences through it. This would make them omnipotent where the priest is concerned but would also explain the gaps in knowledge where the god doesn’t have a following, creating a blind spot in their knowledge.
Undead would be a perversion of this power unless the god themselves are gods of undead. This explains why they resent lichdom and other intelligent undead. Unless it's a god of undead, then the perversion itself is an act of piety and grants this energy to the font the god pulls from.
So in Golarion, the star stone actually allows humans to tap into this shared essence that followers generate, giving them the ability to harness the ability, elevating an individual to godhood. While very powerful, unless they have a large, devout following, they don’t have as much energy or experience with it as other gods might. The new young gods tend to attract a large following granting them great power but they still lack the experience and haven’t had it suffuse their essence. They further haven’t been able to move between spheres of influence, making them much easier to truly kill since you only need to destroy the god in a single location, unlike other gods who may have other aspects in other universes. (Pelor on Greyhawk is remarkably similar to Sarenrae; one might even say they are different aspects of the same god. So even if you challenge her, she might be able to do a balance transfer from another aspect in another universe while Aroden couldn’t accomplish this allowing him to be slain.)
Irori was able to tap into this mass power by sheer personal understanding and exploration achieving one-ness with the universe and thus granting him access to this font of power. Having followers revere him has further granted him access to a larger pool.
Using this analogy you might be able to further speculate that this divine energy is actually finite in quantity; each individual adding to the sum total that the gods then vie for by converting followers from other gods. Gorum might gain some by having individuals slain in their proper aspect like a great bloody war. Sarenrae and Asmodeus lose a share of energy that Gorum is granted. As he spends it, he must foment more wars to further increase his power. This explains the need for souls ending in their proper place and why holy wars might erupt.
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Interesting. Taking this one step further, it seems the "god energy" could conceiveably resurrect a dead god if enough worshippers continue to honor him/her through sacrifice, rituals, holy tasks, etc.
So...Aroden may be able to come back, provided his church is able to grow to a large enough level...
If I remember correctly they had a module/campaign in the old AD&D with this as the theme of the arch. Was pretty interesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Gods
|
|
The concept that the existence of gods is in no way reliant on worshipers, even in this vein of logic. However, the ability to act within a sphere of influence is. It would explain how dead gods, even Golarian has said they have them, would have lost the sphere of influence.
Further, worship does seem in every campaign (including Golarian unless you have some other reason to even have a classification of major and minor deities) and fantasy I've ever read to enhance or diminish a god. They would have an obvious baseline power set to simply be a god, major or minor, but it might help someone understand the wars between gods and why there are power shifts and struggles among even them.
Further extrapolation would actually show how the subversion of followers would dictate the decline in a god's power. It provides two avenues to cause the waning of a god. One would be to truly slay a god, a monumental task to be sure. The second would simply be through the decline of a power by the systematic destruction or subversion of a god's worshipers.
I'm not suggesting that this be adopted for organized play, though I personally think that would be pretty damn cool. However, if you're having problems explaining things like the power of a god, how theists and atheists effect the outcome of the gods and why they would care if anyone worships them or not, this concept is something that is easy to understand and implement. It provides a way to create holy war on a grand scale for the purposes of a campaign.
Like I stated above, I'm turning over concepts in my head and might mess with a bit if someone wanted a mechanics system. And as with any game setting, feel free to allow or disallow it in yours.
This is basically Pratchett theology.
And it does not apply in Golarion. JJ has said that the power/existence of gods is in no way dependant upon followers.
Which I regard as a good thing: gods should be ineffable.
In direct reply to you sir (I am using this term without knowledge of your gender. I don't haunt these forums often, this being I believe my second post. If offense is given, I apologize.), I haven't heard of Pratchett theology and have only read one book of his, actually co-authored by Neil Gaiman. I can only assume that he makes the assumption that a god is granted what powers he has by man himself.
If that is the case, then I'm offering forward a hybrid of this concept. A god is a god, with or without followers. A strong base of followers would in fact strengthen or weaken said god as well in this concept. It would explain how a god could be forgotten and lose the ability to interact with a world, the idea of which is even represented in Golarion. I am unfortunately at work and am either playing or running a game tonight, but once I have my books I should be able to site references. If you're eager though, I believe it's either in "Inner Sea World Guide" or "Gods and Magic", if not both.
|
|
I disagree with you about evil gods having fewer followers. They may have less human, elf, dwarf, and halfling followers, but orcs, goblins, and kobolds, ogres, etc follow the evil gods. For that matter, I'd say undead probably count towards the following of the evil gods, as well.
Fair enough. I completely agree on the intelligent undead following evil gods if that wasn't defined well enough above. I wasn't fair in my statement that evil gods have fewer worshipers since I didn't take into account the monstrous humanoid races (man, that sounds racist) that populate the lands and underdark. I will take it into account as I continue to shape this concept.
Did you explain to your player that this is how they work in your game and not every game or integral to the system?
Personally I dislike cosmologies where the Gods are dependent on mortal worshipers for power and existence. It makes them seem less likes gods.
|
Fair enough. I completely agree on the intelligent undead following evil gods if that wasn't defined well enough above. I wasn't fair in my statement that evil gods have fewer worshipers since I didn't take into account the monstrous humanoid races (man, that sounds racist) that populate the lands and underdark. I will take it into account as I continue to shape this concept.I disagree with you about evil gods having fewer followers. They may have less human, elf, dwarf, and halfling followers, but orcs, goblins, and kobolds, ogres, etc follow the evil gods. For that matter, I'd say undead probably count towards the following of the evil gods, as well.
I wasn't just talking about intelligent undead. Even the mindless zombies (literally) are doing the work of the evil gods, whether that's what their direct controller intends or not.
Actually, that's another aspect to consider. Besides worship, would mortals add to the power of a god by contributing to their domain? ie Would the god of war become more powerful every time a war breaks out, even if nobody involved is fighting in his name? Does the god of art get more powerful every time a painter creates something beautiful and shares it with the world? Would those types of things count as unintentional "worship" for adding to the power of the appropriate dieties?
|
|
Did you explain to your player that this is how they work in your game and not every game or integral to the system?
Personally I dislike cosmologies where the Gods are dependent on mortal worshipers for power and existence. It makes them seem less likes gods.
Again, this actually does not dictate that the gods are reliant on their worshipers for existence, though it does grant them *additional* powers beyond that of a god with fewer followers. In no way are they or would they be reliant on the followers to be a god or even to have a certain amount of power, instead it would act to augment said power.
Also, this isn't anything I'm currently using, it's just a mental exercise for me. =D
In society play I go by the book and in my home campaign, I'm either a player in Golarion or I'm storytelling using another system.
|
I kinda like how deity-power is explaned in the FR novel, Finder's Bane.
It makes deities a bit weaker in general (great by me) and makes a deity's power dependent on followers but, despite being a badly written book, I like the idea.
We had a Thread on this a few years ago and the one problem, I think Heathy and I talked about it, is that if the sheer number of followers made a deity more powerful, Maglubiyet and Kurtulmak would be much stronger. So I came up with the notion that it's not just number of followers but Class Levels/ Hit Dice of followers.
|
|
I kinda like how deity-power is explaned in the FR novel, Finder's Bane.
It makes deities a bit weaker in general (great by me) and makes a deity's power dependent on followers but, despite being a badly written book, I like the idea.
We had a Thread on this a few years ago and the one problem, I think Heathy and I talked about it, is that if the sheer number of followers made a deity more powerful, Maglubiyet and Kurtelmak would be much stronger. So I came up with the notion that it's not just number of followers but Class Levels/ Hit Dice of followers.
Another problem with basing power on number of followers, which using HD doesn't solve, is that someone like the god of war would lose followers regularly, because they'd get killed doing his bidding (starting wars which wipe out large numbers of them).
That's why I'd think it would be better to base the whole thing on the god's sphere of influence. If war has decimated the population, then the god of war would benefit from having been successful, even if there's less people left to worship him.
|
|
I wasn't just talking about intelligent undead. Even the mindless zombies (literally) are doing the work of the evil gods, whether that's what their direct controller intends or not.Actually, that's another aspect to consider. Besides worship, would mortals add to the power of a god by contributing to their domain? ie Would the god of war become more powerful every time a war breaks out, even if nobody involved is fighting in his name? Does the god of art get more powerful every time a painter creates something beautiful and shares it with the world? Would those types of things count as unintentional "worship" for adding to the power of the appropriate dieties?
I don't know that in my concept a mindless undead would be actively increasing the power of a god, the controller of the mindless undead would be the ones actually increasing a gods power base. Otherwise, they'd be the same as an atheist, neither strengthening nor weakening any god.
And yes, a simple war would empower Gorum; a holy war might empower Sarenrae, Rovagug and Gorum all at once. In terms of mechanics, that's actually what I'm tossing around right now. How would the power division occur in that scenario. And Pharasma would take her toll as the dead passed through her hands, much like Charon.
An artist creating for a god would empower that god and if the art was transcending, might empower a god of art while an artist baring his soul might empower either no one or a specific god depending on his faith, pantheon and belief structure.
In this concept, the belief of the mortal is tantamount and can sway who or what might be gaining anything from his acts. A theist would appropriately strengthen or weaken a god based on his belief where as an atheist would not. It's why gods fight and vie for the souls and belief of mortals. Otherwise, what is the purpose of a god ever trying to gain a following? As to giving Gorum his due, simply the belief that he *is* the god of war, exists and is empowered by them might be enough to give him due, while an atheist simply does not believe in him so does not empower him.
Finally, this is all a mental exercise and some concepts that I am enjoying bandying about. Feel free to use them if they strike a chord or ignore them if they set your nerves on edge.
=D
|
|
The god of war would lose followers regularly...
Yeah, good point.
In the last couple years I've added more to this, though not because I thought of the problem you saw.
See, when a follower dies, his Petitioner goes to the deity's Outer Plane (or Abyssal Layer or wherever appropriate) where it can still provide Divine power to the deity.
But,... the higher up the CR ladder the Petitioner climbs, the less power he can provide to the deity.
I haven't really thought it through so much but it seems okay.
That's one way it could work. Then again you can have gods that are independent of their worshipers. Krom (Conan series) for example cares not for useless followers. You're really irrelevant to him and he'd likely think less of you for worshiping him. All depends on what sort of world/cosmology you want to build.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I kind of like the concept that its not so much followers who provide the power, but more the ideals the gods represent and how readily they turn up in the world.
For instance, the god of War actually becomes more powerful when there is more war. Thus he/she would selectively grant more power to those who promote his values and ask him for the power. It doesn't matter how many follwers he has, as long as there is a great deal of war.
The god of love gets power when more love is around, so they obviously provide more assistance to those trying to get this going.
As such, the wars of the gods are about conflicting ideals, as they grant power to one while negating the power of another. Also, the gods might be fighting to steal the area of influence of antoher god.
Sometimes, particularly as technologoes and civilisations arise, a new source of power comes into being. For example, as more people begin to study the power of guns in Alkenstar, there may be a power that manifests around this influence on teh world. A new domain then arrises that the gods fight to access or risk a newcomer entering and taking it for themselves. In this way, new gods can arrise.
When Aroden died, his worshippers lost their power. Not because his ideals had gone, but because another deity had usurped them for its own powers and what he/she feels is worthy of granting the power is different to Arrodens. His worshippers need to learn the new rules, in essence, to gain their power again. Of course this also means thye may need to follow a new god, if they can discover which ones took his domains.
Subtle difference to the original concept, as its not about how many worshipers, and more about the prevalence of their domain in the world.
Eberron kind of touched on this.
Cheers
|
|
Wrath, that's kind of where I was trying to go with my idea, though I didn't explain it very well. It's not about what the worshipers do. It's about something happening within the diety's sphere of influence. ie An artist who happens to be an atheist creates statues, and the god(dess) of art profits from it, just because there happens to be more art in the world, being appreciated by more people.
|
|
Nicely written Czrenobog. I love this kind of thinking and believe it needs to continue to happen to enrich games.
For a campaign element, a power pool that the God's pull upon is a very cool concept. In addition to explaining mortals' ascension to divinity, it can also explain how some items rise to artifact status without divine or mythic intervention.
Keep up the theorizing, I look forward to continued discussion on this post and new theories as you come up with them. Thanks for putting the work into this theory and posting it to the forums.
|
|
This is basically Pratchett theology.
[tangent]
And thus the great god Om spake unto Brutha... "Psst."...
...
And thus the great god Om spake unto Brutha... again... "Psst."
...
...
And a third time did Om call unto Brutha... "Down here, you idiot!"
(paraphrased)
(this may be my favorite exposition of any Terry Pratchett book, only possibly matched by the conversation between Death and the Man on the Mountain in Soul Music)
[/tangent]
|
In direct reply to you sir (I am using this term without knowledge of your gender. I don't haunt these forums often, this being I believe my second post. If offense is given, I apologize.), I haven't heard of Pratchett theology and have only read one book of his, actually co-authored by Neil Gaiman. I can only assume that he makes the assumption that a god is granted what powers he has by man himself.
It's all good, my forum name is actually a male Welsh name + the name of a male Tolkein character - so you were spot on.
Pratchett goes into it all in Small Gods, a most excellent read.
His gods' power is based upon number of followers and strength of belief.
It features a god who has loads of people who pay lip service to him but only one simple-minded soul actually believes. The god struggles for his very existence and much hilarity ensues.
I kinda like how deity-power is explaned in the FR novel, Finder's Bane.
It makes deities a bit weaker in general (great by me) and makes a deity's power dependent on followers but, despite being a badly written book, I like the idea.
We had a Thread on this a few years ago and the one problem, I think Heathy and I talked about it, is that if the sheer number of followers made a deity more powerful, Maglubiyet and Kurtulmak would be much stronger. So I came up with the notion that it's not just number of followers but Class Levels/ Hit Dice of followers.
That was the major thrust of one of my long term FR campaigns.
A groups of god haters made up of Ur-Priests, the god-hating gargoyles, and, others were working behind the scenes to incite the followers of the different gods to kill each other and thus weaken all of the gods.
I like this topic a lot, and agree with Wrath.
I always take actual historical mythology as a gold standard when thinking about gods. A valid theological point of view must explain how antique gods relate to each other.
Greek and Norse mythology both fit well within the portfolio = power thing more than with followers = power. In fact, they don't seem to care at all about followers, except when it makes them look good for other gods.
Iliad is a great example of what's in humanity for the gods. Hera and Athena are pissed because Paris chose Aphrodite, not because he's important as such. Apolo takes part in the war because the greek army and allied gods are making him look foolish as the main god of Troy because they permitted the desecration of his temple. And Poseidon is pissed against heroes who don't offer him respects because that makes him look weak from others' gods point of view if he doesn't react.
Zeus tries to stop their fights over puny humans since as the Lord of Olympia, he draws power from the unity of his pantheon - and so must also be extra careful with his punishment (he does also punish individuals who make him or other gods look bad in mythology).
The whole clerics thing is way less of a priority for that kind of gods. They are little if anything pictured in epics when so many warrior heroes are gloriously represented.
There is another aspect to how Gods work in fantasy settings. How common and obvious are the "miracles" dieties perform?
This question has a direct bearing on how much the common folk know about and believe in the Gods themselves.
For example, take a world where actualy divine casters are few and far in between. There are hedge wizards here and there how are willing to pretend to be holy men to fleece the foolish out of their money. Their "miracles" are actually a mix of stage tricks or arcane magic. Most commoners don't have enough skill to know the difference between a divine and an arcane caster. Inevitably, the tricksters are exposed as frauds. Most commoners would believes that the gods exists, but they would distrustful of anyone claiming to speak for a particular god. How would they react if an actual cleric came along? How would they know the difference?
The alternate example would be a world where divine power is commonplace. You can wolk down to a temple in a major city and find 3 level 5+ clerics. Anyone who fakes being an oracle or cleric of a particular diety can expect to be found out pretty quickly, and they retribution is liable to be very unpleasant.
Most campaigns I play are actually a mix of the 2 with the first example being typical of the backwoods commoners and the second example being the people who live in and near large population centers.
I like this topic a lot, and agree with Wrath.
Greek and Norse mythology both fit well within the portfolio = power thing more than with followers = power. In fact, they don't seem to care at all about followers, except when it makes them look good for other gods.
Definitely this. I see gods as being more concerned with legitimizing their portfolio, followers are a means to an end. Plus they can be used to interfere with rival gods.
By legitimize, i mean that they promote the things that they represent as gods, thus securing their position as important gods.
I love this thread, even though I do not use this theology. It IS a pain when my players base plots and plans based on this flow.