Dude fought for and died for everyone in the multiverse, to ensure that free will could be a thing. He was a, if not the, Big Good in the Pathfinderverse.
Demons believe in Free Will too. Ihys was a Big Chaos (in a fundamentally different way than the Proteans).
I think the war between Asmodeus and Ihys was a Law/Chaos war. Sarenrae shows up right after Ihys died and invented Good.
I'm still of the opinion that Ihys became The Oinodaemon.
I can see how the corpse of a God murdered by his brother might empower a race of nihilists who want to suicide out the whole universe.
Is there a single book all of this wonderful lore is in?
lubs me some lore!
Wasn't it said somewhere that Pharasma is the oldest of the deities, followed by old Asmo and his shanked brother?
If the Book of the Damned can be trusted, Pharasma can't be oldest, unless she adopted her current role. I have a suspicion the Pharasma might have been created by the other Gods as part of the treaty that ended the War in Heaven between Asmodeus and Ihys, to minimize warring over the (newly free) souls.
But if the Book of the Damned can't be trusted, then its possible Ihys never actually existed in the first place, and the story simply serves to simultaneously glorify (as the First God) and humanize (as a tragic figure who regrets the slaying of his brother, and thus justifies his relative hermitage) Asmodeus.
Is there a single book all of this wonderful lore is in?
lubs me some lore!
Book of the Damned I: Princes of Darkness has all the info on Ihys, as well as a (possibly quite biased or otherwise flawed) history of the early multiverse.
This is Golarion specific, correct?
I shall buy this on payday.
Thanks Ross!
So to get the skinny on all the gods, powerful devils/outsiders, their origins, etc, that's covered in multiple books?
So to get the skinny on all the gods, powerful devils/outsiders, their origins, etc, that's covered in multiple books?
Yes. Though Inner Sea Gods is the best place to go if you only have time/money/attention span for one book.
And many of them have barely been covered at all. We know relatively little about Asuras, for instance. And divs and kytons haven't gotten their own books, but have been discussed a bit in the backmatter of APs.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Book of the Damned I: Princes of Darkness has all the info on Ihys, as well as a (possibly quite biased or otherwise flawed) history of the early multiverse.Is there a single book all of this wonderful lore is in?
lubs me some lore!
It's awesome, but that typeface is super hard to read.
IIRC, this is about all that's been revealed.
Short version: CG, creator of language, god of freedom/free will.
Ihys's alignment is conjecture. I'd agree he's Chaotic, as the creator of free will. But I'm not sure we have a good reason to assume he's Good other that to insure his duality with his LE brother.
Especially as the Book of the Damned can be interpreted to mean Good and Evil weren't really concepts until after his death.
So is Ihys then supposed to be resurrected?
Not really, well if you could take what it is left from him, in Asmodeus secret room in Nessus, probably..but not soon, Asmodeus is far more powerful than the majority of gods, he is just wounded by Ihys dead, his present god form is a weak version of himself. One day the true Asmodeus will rise and will begin a new era.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I found out about Ihys when I wanted to make up a rabbi; he's an enlightened philosopher who venerates the memory of Ihys.
The way he tells it, a representative from every plane got to make manifest on the nexus between them to write a rule for it; Asmodeus invented time, making things happen after each other, while Ihys invented probability, so that the most likely thing wouldn't always have to happen ("You can see it every day, with every risky decision you Pathfinders make that works."); then Asmodeus invited Ihys to a remote bit of the Dark Tapestry to invent betrayal and show it to the being that called themselves brothers before they had to leave.
Where Ihys' corpse was left, parasites festered in it, as he says, resulting in the being known as Azathoth.
"To this day, why people would make deals with the thing that invented betrayal is beyond me."
With everything that claims to be first, either they weren't aware of each other, time didn't really happen until Asmodeus had it standardized, or there was historical revisionism from all sides.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Shifty Mongoose wrote:
"To this day, why people would make deals with the thing that invented betrayal is beyond me."
Is this a quote?
Because it is really the one loophole in the Book of the Damned creation myth as pro Asmodeus propaganda.
Good quote though.
Well actually it never says the thing about Azathoth, but it says that Asmodeus has the body of his brother in a secret room in Nessus.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dude fought for and died for everyone in the multiverse, to ensure that free will could be a thing. He was a, if not the, Big Good in the Pathfinderverse.Demons believe in Free Will too. Ihys was a Big Chaos (in a fundamentally different way than the Proteans).
I think the war between Asmodeus and Ihys was a Law/Chaos war. Sarenrae shows up right after Ihys died and invented Good.
I agree that the war was primarily between Chaos/Law, but I still think of Ihys as a Big Good. Partially because it plays against that (rather frustrating) interpretation of Law/Chaos as just being Good/Evil by a different name with Law filling in for Good and Chaos for Evil and that "Lawful Good = Best Good" thing. And then there's the Ahura Mazda parallels at play.
And while I'd agree that demons believe in free will(at least their own), I'd say LG angels, archons, and gods do as well, since you can't really be Good(or Evil) without it. (which is another reason I disagree with interpretations of exemplar outsiders not having any free will at all and "Always ____" alignments for mortal races)
That is, if all of the current info on Ihys can be taken at face value, of course. :)
IIRC, this is about all that's been revealed.
Short version: CG, creator of language, god of freedom/free will.
Ihys's alignment is conjecture. I'd agree he's Chaotic, as the creator of free will. But I'm not sure we have a good reason to assume he's Good other that to insure his duality with his LE brother.
Especially as the Book of the Damned can be interpreted to mean Good and Evil weren't really concepts until after his death.
I don't have my books nearby, but this bit speaks strongly for Ihys being Good, I think:
Asmodeus, devasted by his brother's act, showed Ihys the chaos and destruction that he had sowed, and Ihys became the first being to know regret; but the empyreal lord Sarenrae came to him and showed him that great good had also come from mortals' freedom and that other gods supported him. War tore the gods, the first conflict between order and chaos. Ihys defended the right of mortals to choose their own destiny with Sarenrae at his right hand
"To this day, why people would make deals with the thing that invented betrayal is beyond me."
I love that quote. :)
So? who knows what is the seal and what happened to it?
So? who knows what is the seal and what happened to it?
Only Wes, I think.
So? who knows what is the seal and what happened to it?
Not supported by anything other than the BotD1 text, I kind of figured the seal was the positive energy plane.
So? who knows what is the seal and what happened to it?Not supported by anything other than the BotD1 text, I kind of figured the seal was the positive energy plane.
It's hidden underneath Kaer Maga and guarded by a monastic street gang?
Wes and Sutter shared an office back then.
And while I'd agree that demons believe in free will(at least their own), I'd say LG angels, archons, and gods do as well, since you can't really be Good(or Evil) without it. (which is another reason I disagree with interpretations of exemplar outsiders not having any free will at all and "Always ____" alignments for mortal races)
Are you saying only real choice makes something good or evil, otherwise its just a neutral sentient robot regardless of whether it is one dedicated to atrocities or to manifest blessings?
Contributor
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are you saying only real choice makes something good or evil, otherwise its just a neutral sentient robot regardless of whether it is one dedicated to atrocities or to manifest blessings?
And while I'd agree that demons believe in free will(at least their own), I'd say LG angels, archons, and gods do as well, since you can't really be Good(or Evil) without it. (which is another reason I disagree with interpretations of exemplar outsiders not having any free will at all and "Always ____" alignments for mortal races)
I think Mikaze is noting the philosophical/religious connection between the idea of free will and good and evil. Neutrality in that tradition is the act of not choosing, or abdication of the moral decision. Now, a lot of things pragmatically can't be boiled down into good or evil, particularly at first.
In medieval legend, the elves and fairies, of course, exist in that in-between state of not making the choice (to be loyal to God or rebel with the Devil, in Christian terms). They have - interestingly enough - a certain devotion to literalism, formulae, oaths - the escape clauses from making conscious choice - in folklore.
Are you saying only real choice makes something good or evil, otherwise its just a neutral sentient robot regardless of whether it is one dedicated to atrocities or to manifest blessings?
And while I'd agree that demons believe in free will(at least their own), I'd say LG angels, archons, and gods do as well, since you can't really be Good(or Evil) without it. (which is another reason I disagree with interpretations of exemplar outsiders not having any free will at all and "Always ____" alignments for mortal races)
I think Mikaze is noting the philosophical/religious connection between the idea of free will and good and evil. Neutrality in that tradition is the act of not choosing, or abdication of the moral decision. Now, a lot of things pragmatically can't be boiled down into good or evil, particularly at first.
In medieval legend, the elves and fairies, of course, exist in that in-between state of not making the choice (to be loyal to God or rebel with the Devil, in Christian terms). They have - interestingly enough - a certain devotion to literalism, formulae, oaths - the escape clauses from making conscious choice - in folklore.
I don't believe that is what he is talking about. Choosing not to take sides, such as the tradition of fairies origins as angels who were neutral in the rebellion, is different than a being not having free will but still doing good or evil.
If the demons rebelled but had no free will in that choice, are they actually evil for rebelling? Are the angels who actively stayed loyal good if they had no free will to actually choose otherwise?
Should demons really be considered evil if they commit atrocities but have no free will to choose otherwise?
|
Contributor
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are you saying only real choice makes something good or evil, otherwise its just a neutral sentient robot regardless of whether it is one dedicated to atrocities or to manifest blessings?
And while I'd agree that demons believe in free will(at least their own), I'd say LG angels, archons, and gods do as well, since you can't really be Good(or Evil) without it. (which is another reason I disagree with interpretations of exemplar outsiders not having any free will at all and "Always ____" alignments for mortal races)
I think Mikaze is noting the philosophical/religious connection between the idea of free will and good and evil. Neutrality in that tradition is the act of not choosing, or abdication of the moral decision. Now, a lot of things pragmatically can't be boiled down into good or evil, particularly at first.
In medieval legend, the elves and fairies, of course, exist in that in-between state of not making the choice (to be loyal to God or rebel with the Devil, in Christian terms). They have - interestingly enough - a certain devotion to literalism, formulae, oaths - the escape clauses from making conscious choice - in folklore.
I don't believe that is what he is talking about. Choosing not to take sides, such as the tradition of fairies origins as angels who were neutral in the rebellion, is different than a being not having free will but still doing good or evil.
If the demons rebelled but had no free will in that choice, are they actually evil for rebelling? Are the angels who actively stayed loyal good if they had no free will to actually choose otherwise?
Should demons really be considered evil if they commit atrocities but have no free will to choose otherwise?
Evil in a mythological sense is a personification or abstract of moral harm, but it extends, to a large degree, to all the "evils" of the world, including natural calamities.
The notion of demons/devils and angels choosing good or evil is a metaphor for our own choices (they signify themselves human capacities and hence are doomed to exemplify what they are), but the Calvinist notion of the impossibility of free will thereby extending to humankind is really out of place in an RPG.
Demons and Angels are reflections of ourselves, inextricably linked to our own free will, but I think may be said to be crystallised in the moment of the decision/act, unlike ourselves.
The Fairies - Fatae - are the mythical True Neutral entities, in that they represent destiny, fate, obligation, the restraint on free will.
They're all facing us, mirroring us, born from our stories. They have freedom or unfreedom in relation to our own notions of these ideas. I'd argue that all these groups can choose different paths but specifically through the intervention or influence of humans/humanoids, who impart their own flexibility. But they can't originate their redemption or fall. In Milton, for example, the precipitating act in Lucifer's fall is the creation of humanity/freewill.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Demons and Angels are reflections of ourselves, inextricably linked to our own free will, but I think may be said to be crystallised in the moment of the decision/act, unlike ourselves.
That's pretty close to the happy medium I prefer for alignment exemplar outsiders, if not spot-on. I've always been annoyed when angels, demons, etc. get reduced to spiritual robots and targets for "humans are better because we have free will" spiels. (which is doubly frustrating when so many of those outsiders used to be humans) It's also frustrating because taking choice out of the equation just cheapens good and evil (and certain values of neutrality).
Strong tendencies towards alignments, but still having the freedom to choose, even to fall or rise, ascend or descend, or become something else entirely(which ties into notes in The Great Beyond about how the angel/demon/etc. state is not the final state for souls on their spiritual journey, with them eventually moving further and further outwards towards "even stranger vistas").
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Casts Animate Thread.
So I have a massive conspiracy theory about Ihys that I'm dying to get some feedback on. It goes thusly:
-Asmodeus offers Ihys his hand, and then betrays him by killing him with a great spear.
-Rovagug appears after Asmodeus has killed Ihys, and goes on a massive rampage.
-Sarenrae is unable (or unwilling...) to kill Rovagug; but due to an alliance with Asmodeus, together they trap him in the Pit of Gormuz.
-Asmodeus holds the key to Rovagug's prison, until such time as the Contract naming him as Rovagug's keeper is ended.
When you put these together, and combine them with the fact that Asmodeus and Sarenrae have every reason to hate each other but still allied to entrap Rovagug, it leads to an insane(ly awesome) possibility.
Suppose that when Asmodeus struck that blow against his brother, it didn't kill him, but instead infused him with all of the hatred and rage that Asmodeus had for the lesser Gods and the mortals. What if Ihys and Rovagug are the same individual?
This would explain both why Sarenrae couldn't kill him, and why she and Asmodeus would be willing to work together, and why Asmodeus would volunteer to hold on to the key (for safe keeping, of course).
Regardless of whether any of this is even plausible, I'm totally going to play an Inquisitor of Asmodeus with the Heretic archetype who is a member of a Cult dedicated to discovering a way for Asmodeus to restore his brother. {You know, after he releases him and helps him clear away all those other pesky life forms.)
Rovagug would appear to be the greatest of the qlippoth lords, the same way Lamashtu is the greatest of the demon lords.
That doesn't make your theory impossible: The first deific murder could be a big enough event to create a time loop or something.
But I'm not sold.
Wasn't it said somewhere that Pharasma is the oldest of the deities, followed by old Asmo and his shanked brother?If the Book of the Damned can be trusted, Pharasma can't be oldest, unless she adopted her current role. I have a suspicion the Pharasma might have been created by the other Gods as part of the treaty that ended the War in Heaven between Asmodeus and Ihys, to minimize warring over the (newly free) souls.
But if the Book of the Damned can't be trusted, then its possible Ihys never actually existed in the first place, and the story simply serves to simultaneously glorify (as the First God) and humanize (as a tragic figure who regrets the slaying of his brother, and thus justifies his relative hermitage) Asmodeus.
Well if we go by the book of James Jacobs or at least as remembered by one person on the internet named Lemartes, Pharasma is the oldest.
Casts Animate Thread.
So I have a massive conspiracy theory about Ihys that I'm dying to get some feedback on. It goes thusly:
-Asmodeus offers Ihys his hand, and then betrays him by killing him with a great spear.
-Rovagug appears after Asmodeus has killed Ihys, and goes on a massive rampage.
-Sarenrae is unable (or unwilling...) to kill Rovagug; but due to an alliance with Asmodeus, together they trap him in the Pit of Gormuz.
-Asmodeus holds the key to Rovagug's prison, until such time as the Contract naming him as Rovagug's keeper is ended.
When you put these together, and combine them with the fact that Asmodeus and Sarenrae have every reason to hate each other but still allied to entrap Rovagug, it leads to an insane(ly awesome) possibility.
Suppose that when Asmodeus struck that blow against his brother, it didn't kill him, but instead infused him with all of the hatred and rage that Asmodeus had for the lesser Gods and the mortals. What if Ihys and Rovagug are the same individual?
This would explain both why Sarenrae couldn't kill him, and why she and Asmodeus would be willing to work together, and why Asmodeus would volunteer to hold on to the key (for safe keeping, of course).
Regardless of whether any of this is even plausible, I'm totally going to play an Inquisitor of Asmodeus with the Heretic archetype who is a member of a Cult dedicated to discovering a way for Asmodeus to restore his brother. {You know, after he releases him and helps him clear away all those other pesky life forms.)
Hmm I actually like this idea. He could be the first Qlippoth. Maybe he sought to destroy creation so that he could reforge it where mortals could have free will. Except his transformation didn't go quite as planned. So I like it that it makes Rovagug a bit more interesting than I'm some nihilistic moron. I mean he's going to destroy himself after he destroys everything right? Just commit suicide and save yourself a lot of effort it will have the same effect from your point of view. Sheesh!
Plus Rovagug's power level really seems to fluctuate in different versions of his story.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rovagug is a qlippoth, not a daemon.
Daemons want to turn out the lights on the universe.
Qlippoth want to destroy that pesky 'reality' so they can go back to festering in the nice quiet hole they call the Abyss.
James Jacobs has very strongly suggested, to the point of all but saying that Ilys never existed and that Asmodeus made him up out of whole cloth to cast himself in a more tragic light.
Personally I don't buy that for a minute. I also don't accept Jacobs' assertion that Pharasma is the oldest of the gods(primarily because I think that's too close to Sandman), but that's neither here nor there.
Anyway, he doesn't go by Ilys in my home game; he goes by He Who Was.
Gods are defined as much by their roles as their identities. Pharasma could be the oldest being, but her role as Goddess of Birth and Death,a and the arbiter on where souls go couldn't have existed until there were mortals to be born and to die, and other Gods and planes of existence to squabble over who gets all that precious soulstuff.
So they could still both be true, in a sense.
i would think he was good, because of how the booked of the damn describes saraenae's love and devotion of him.
Rovagug is a qlippoth, not a daemon.
Daemons want to turn out the lights on the universe.
Qlippoth want to destroy that pesky 'reality' so they can go back to festering in the nice quiet hole they call the Abyss.
I am aware of this. However, I thought Rovagug was all about destroying everything. Seems he want's to destroy all of reality too.
Or am I wrong?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
"All of reality" is a relative term.
My understanding, which is also potentially wrong, is that the daemons are true nihilists. They have completely internalized "life is suffering" as a reason to perpetuate suffering and end life. If death is inevitable for everything, they might as well speed it along. They want to cause the end of the universe/multiverse, either through wrecking the whole thing or by breaking the cycle of creation and destruction so that creation stops and destruction/entropy eventually brings everything to a close. They can be patient. Generally speaking, they don't want to end themselves, except as an eventuality, because they need to be able to make sure creation doesn't start over again, or find if there are any free-floating planes or parallel worlds they missed in the first apocalypse. Yes, that's hypocritical, but I think we can agree that the daemons are massive hypocrites on several levels.
In contrast, qlippoth want to wipe out mortal life so that the demons stop, well, existing and they can take over the Abyss once again, and go back to how they were before the Abyss opened one end into the maelstrom. As a race, they would prefer the multiverse go back to being a universe. (Someone on these forums once described them as the grumpy old men of the planes, screaming for all of reality to get off their collective lawns.)
Rovagug is a specific, powerful, being, and might not exactly share the racial ethos. But he's most famous for his spawn. And qlippoth are often portrayed as a more primal/primitive sort of evil. I expect that Rovagug's end goal (if he has one: CE beings are not required to think past their immediate wants) is something like kill everything that isn't 'self', then spend the rest of eternity in a incestuous eat/spawn/repeat loop with his spawn and possibly the other qlippoth.
Edit: An analogy, here. The daemons are an apocalyptic force. They want to burn the world, to salt the earth, or deplete the soil so that nothing new can grow. In their wake lie nothing but bones, ashes, and dirt. In contrast, the qlippoth are more of a kudzu or a plague. They will spread to the exclusion of everything else. That's fairly academic if you're the one in their way: a tree doesn't much care about being claimed by fire or smothered by a creeping vine. But the goals ARE different.
"All of reality" is a relative term.
My understanding, which is also potentially wrong, is that the daemons are true nihilists. They have completely internalized "life is suffering" as a reason to perpetuate suffering and end life. If death is inevitable for everything, they might as well speed it along. They want to cause the end of the universe/multiverse, either through wrecking the whole thing or by breaking the cycle of creation and destruction so that creation stops and destruction/entropy eventually brings everything to a close. They can be patient. Generally speaking, they don't want to end themselves, except as an eventuality, because they need to be able to make sure creation doesn't start over again, or find if there are any free-floating planes or parallel worlds they missed in the first apocalypse. Yes, that's hypocritical, but I think we can agree that the daemons are massive hypocrites on several levels.
Agreed. Will add up until that time they are about grabbing mortal souls cause that is what they "live" off of. I really think these I want to kill everything guys should just start with themselves. ;)
In contrast, qlippoth want to wipe out mortal life so that the demons stop, well, existing and they can take over the Abyss once again, and go back to how they were before the Abyss opened one end into the maelstrom. As a race, they would prefer the multiverse go back to being a universe. (Someone on these forums once described them as the grumpy old men of the planes, screaming for all of reality to get off their collective lawns.)
I will agree here with no additions. :)
Rovagug is a specific, powerful, being, and might not exactly share the racial ethos. But he's most famous for his spawn. And qlippoth are often portrayed as a more primal/primitive sort of evil. I expect that Rovagug's end goal (if he has one: CE beings are not required to think past their immediate wants) is something like kill everything that isn't 'self', then spend the rest of eternity in a incestuous eat/spawn/repeat loop with his spawn and possibly the other qlippoth.
Okay so he's not going to off himself. That makes him a much better character.
Edit: An analogy, here. The daemons are an apocalyptic force. They want to burn the world, to salt the earth, or deplete the soil so that nothing new can grow. In their wake lie...
Dicks!
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really think these I want to kill everything guys should just start with themselves. ;)
We'd all be better off. But from the daemons' point of view, some of us would still be alive and enjoying ourselves. And that's unacceptable.
Dicks!
You try to destroy one measly universe, all of a sudden you're the bad guy.
i would think he was good, because of how the booked of the damn describes saraenae's love and devotion of him.Kinda like Aroden and Iomede, huh?
And what was Aroden's alignment again?
... did she? I thought she was devoted to him, as her deity, but as I understood it, she was first a paladin of Arazni, and then (after Arazni bit it) she switched her patronage to Aroden? Or was there a retcon of stuff? Or did I just have it wrong the whole time?
|
|
I think Io was noted as being dedicated to Aroden, but it was definitely noted that she was also more open-minded and forward thinking than he was. With Ihys, going off of PathfinderWiki at the moment mind, we do see him moved to sadness over the troubles his actions brought about.
It's been way too long since I've read Princes of Darkness...
It's awesome, but that typeface is super hard to read.Book of the Damned I: Princes of Darkness has all the info on Ihys, as well as a (possibly quite biased or otherwise flawed) history of the early multiverse.Is there a single book all of this wonderful lore is in?
lubs me some lore!
I agree, I've skimmed over it or skipped it instead of doing a thorough reading of that section a number of times for that reason.
Now that I have the PDF, when I get around to reading it in depth I plan to copy the text into a word document and change it into a more readable font.
Speaking of parallels with Christianity, it looks like this thread rose again from the dead...
I approve of this, because this thread is made of winsauce.
It's been way too long since I've read Princes of Darkness...
Easy remedy for that, also, /r/nocontext
One of the things I like about the Ihys/Asmodeus story is how nicely it fits with the daemons. They are described as a cancer eating away at the multiverse, and as the cycle of souls continues they slowly grow stronger. It's what Asmodeus warned Ihys about, and the price of having the rest of the planes.
It's been way too long since I've read Princes of Darkness...Easy remedy for that, also, /r/nocontext
One of the things I like about the Ihys/Asmodeus story is how nicely it fits with the daemons. They are described as a cancer eating away at the multiverse, and as the cycle of souls continues they slowly grow stronger. It's what Asmodeus warned Ihys about, and the price of having the rest of the planes.
I figured it was a combination of daemons, kytons, and what mortals were doing that turned them into such things that traumatized Azzy.
Dude's got issues.
The Ihys/Asmodeus conflict in a nutshell ;)
Now my personal headcannon for what Asmodeus sounds like when he's angry enough to lose his cool.