If I successfully manage to get my group to pick up PFS, I was curious about how to play up atheism in PF. Given that there is clearly divine and arcane magic in the world, along with angels, demons, undead, so on and so forth, how am I supposed to make atheists work?
A: "There are gods"
B: "No there aren't"
A: "But clerics channel their power"
B: "No they don't"
A: "There are demons"
B: "No there aren't"
A: "But there's the worldwound"
B: "No such place"
A: "We can use magic to contact the gods and angels"
B: "I speak to them too, in the middle of a drunken stupor"
I honestly have no idea how to portray atheists in a fantasy setting where you can contact divine beings as early as level 3. Agnosticism I can understand, but I'm worried about making the Greycloaks look like fools.
(This is not a thread to discuss religion, please keep the real world out of this thread and please open your own if you want to bring in all of those arguments with you, this is PURELY an in-game quandary)
Religion is about belief.
Many people choose to believe things that a evidently dubious or outright wrong.
Atheism in Golarion is probably a more philosophical worldview than actually anti-faith.
There's always Rahadoum in Golarion. I guess they're not technically atheists, but they don't like the chains that come with the worship of the gods and have banned religion in their country. No religion in the country means no followers. No followers means the gods have limited capability to do anything there (without their devotion to draw upon).
|
5 people marked this as a favorite.
|
In a fantasy world, someone who doesn't believe that the various gods *don't exist* has a hard row to hoe.
The game setting has several types of people called atheists and most of them are pople who know that there are powerful outsiders that call themselves gods and have all sorts of spellcasting worshippers, but don't believe that those outsiders *deserve to be worshipped.*
That particular branch can be further divided into;
'atheists' who don't believe those powerful outsiders are gods at all, any more than the various demon lords, etc. who *also* can grant spells to clerics are 'gods' and
'atheists' who don't care whether those powerful outsiders are 'gods' or not, but strongly believe that whatever they are, they don't deserve to be worshipped.
There may indeed be 'atheists' who flat out don't believe in gods at all, and think that clerics are all lying or deluded about the source of their powers, which, at the end of the day, aren't any more 'proof' of gods than the equally wondrous and mystical powers of druids (who don't need gods) or oracles (who don't need gods) or wizards (who don't need gods) or witches (who don't need gods). Those particular atheists might not feel that a clerics 'god' is any more a 'god' than a witches patron or an oracles mystery, both of which are potential sources of vast magical power, and may or may not be in any way gods.
It's not like any of those 'atheists' are ever going to meet a god, and be proven wrong (at least before meeting Pharasma...), so ultimately they aren't even that crazy. The vast, vast, vast majority of true believers and high level clerics and whatnot will not *know* until they die whether or not the 'gods' they worship even exist, or if they are being strung along by lower level outsiders. The first time a fanatically devoted cleric casts augury or divination to get a heads up from the god he's devoted his entire life to serving *and the information is wrong because he rolled bad,* well, even the cleric has to wonder sometimes if 'god' means what he thinks it means...
I could be completely wrong on this, but the few PFS games I played in the Heresy series and one other with the Grey Cloaks, I got the impression that they were more anti-theists than atheist. It isn't that they didn't believe in the gods, they just hated them and wanted them out of their lives.
If I am wrong, you could go the route that they believe in more powerful beings, but they just don't deserve the title of gods.
It would seem possible to be an atheist cleric who worships nature or a philosophy, such as Good or Fire and still be considered an atheist while having access to all the same healing or divine spells as someone who worships a 'god'.
They probably wouldn't use the word 'cleric' or 'priest' to describe themselves however.
Sitri wrote: I could be completely wrong on this, but the few PFS games I played in the Heresy series and one other with the Grey Cloaks, I got the impression that they were more anti-theists than atheist. It isn't that they didn't believe in the gods, they just hated them and wanted them out of their lives. The game actually gave a definition to 'atheism' in Golarian. It actually came out more like misotheism, or "hatred of God." As that suggests, this philosophy goes: "Those jerks up in Heaven and Nirvana and whatever are just as bad as the demons and devils. Why should I listen to any of them?" You have to acknowledge that beings referred to as 'Gods' exist, but you do not have to agree that they are 'divine' and should be the objects of worship and control on the mortal plain (Jacobs, Inner Sea World Guide, 236). They are just another kind of powerful outsider, who have used their power to create a positive image (or at least an image deserving absolute respect) associated with them.
The interesting thing is this: since many of the powerful creatures of the outerspheres were created from the souls of mortals, you could almost view the belief that you should not worship the Gods comes down to almost more of a political belief. Heck, some of the gods are just mortals that stumbled their way through the Starstone (Cayden). Do you allow dragons to control your kingdom? Why should it be any different with a magical creature that just happens to come from another plane?
Pizza Lord wrote: It would seem possible to be an atheist cleric who worships nature or a philosophy, such as Good or Fire and still be considered an atheist while having access to all the same healing or divine spells as someone who worships a 'god'. PFS won't let you play characters like that though. You have to have a god if your a cleric, cavalier of the order of the star, paladin, inquisitor, and I probably missed something else.
Anyways, more of a world-view yeah. I do have a heretic character for example who doesn't view the gods as necessary, and believes it entirely possible to repeat miracles with arcane magic. He has a thesis on divinity and how its not as special as everyone thinks. Similarly I have another character who doesn't care for the gods at all, so atheist fits him perfectly. Can he be healed by a channel and see smiting? Sure! Does he care? He's pretty neutral about it.
I think we need to emphasize the "deserves to be worshipped" bit. If we define a god as a being that has some special quality that makes it deserving of worship, then atheism can make a lot of sense in a D&D setting. They simply deny any such quality actually exists; nothing deservers worship. Just because you live on an outer plane, give out free food, and offer spells in exchange for devotion/worship/prayer doesn't mean you deserve the prayer and worship -- special powers and gifts do not change this.
Indeed, you could argue that all beings demanding worship like that are abusing that power. It's not like the gods of the setting are saying "hey, you believe what I do, sign up with my organization. You'll be part of our team and get some cool powers as long as you serve well." That's not what happens. Instead it's "worship me mortals, be beholden to me. Follow my teachings. Pray to me. Obey my wishes/demands/etc. If you do that well, I shall give you power." Looked at that way, it's easy to see how that could make someone disgusted with such behavior.
Doesn't matter if whatever god has or claims to have good goals or even does good work. That doesn't make what they do less of an abuse of unfathomable power. Strictly speaking, it doesn't mean such a character dislikes the good "gods" as much as the "evil" ones. Rather, they view them both just as bad in one respect. A good atheist would still work with the good guys long before working with the bad guys -- and long before working with the bad guy atheists in all likelihood (barring very unusual circumstances). In other words, sure what the good "gods" do is ethically wrong, but there are worse wrongs in the world and one shouldn't lose sight of that.
Drachasor wrote: Doesn't matter if whatever god has or claims to have good goals or even does good work. That doesn't make what they do less of an abuse of unfathomable power. Strictly speaking, it doesn't mean such a character dislikes the good "gods" as much as the "evil" ones. Rather, they view them both just as bad in one respect. A good atheist would still work with the good guys long before working with the bad guys -- and long before working with the bad guy atheists in all likelihood (barring very unusual circumstances). In other words, sure what the good "gods" do is ethically wrong, but there are worse wrongs in the world and one shouldn't lose sight of that. Unfortunately, it appears that whether you are good or evil, any 'atheist' is still treated the same: thrown out as trash and possibly used to keep one of the various existence ending powers appeased. Although some go into just being wandering spirits or reincarnation, but that might be the exception to the rule.
It could merely be the idea that the individual in question worships no god. They accept the premise of the gods in Golarion but choose to believe they should rely on themselves rather than far off deities who may or may not care about their existence.
lemeres wrote: Drachasor wrote: Doesn't matter if whatever god has or claims to have good goals or even does good work. That doesn't make what they do less of an abuse of unfathomable power. Strictly speaking, it doesn't mean such a character dislikes the good "gods" as much as the "evil" ones. Rather, they view them both just as bad in one respect. A good atheist would still work with the good guys long before working with the bad guys -- and long before working with the bad guy atheists in all likelihood (barring very unusual circumstances). In other words, sure what the good "gods" do is ethically wrong, but there are worse wrongs in the world and one shouldn't lose sight of that. Unfortunately, it appears that whether you are good or evil, any 'atheist' is still treated the same: thrown out as trash and possibly used to keep one of the various existence ending powers appeased. Although some go into just being wandering spirits or reincarnation, but that might be the exception to the rule. Which is really all the more reason not to support such an immoral system and those that uphold it.
"Blind obedience to another's will is too high a price to pay for power. I'd rather have less, but wield it however I wish."
I think that's as close as one may intelligently come to 'atheism' in a realm wherein the gods are empirically verifiable, and that's more skepticism of the gods' motives.
I don't know what a greycloak is, but the existence of deities and their agents is nigh impossible to ignore in Golarion. You would not have a logical point to stand on. Your character would be that person who refuses to believe ____ just out of sheer stubbornness most likely.
Jaelithe wrote: "Blind obedience to another's will is too high a price to pay for power. I'd rather have less, but wield it however I wish."
I think that's as close as one may intelligently come to 'atheism' in a realm wherein the gods are empirically verifiable, and that's more skepticism of the gods' motives.
Depends on how you define "god." A powerful being calling itself a god doesn't mean it is a god. For certain values of "god" one could claim that they don't exist in the setting or even that they can't exist in any setting.
Atheism wouldn't exist in Golarion. Such a concept couldn't possibly be analogous to atheism of the real world in any way shape or form.
The reason real atheists dont believe in gods is because there isn't any evidence for believing in them. But in a fantasy world, there's loads of evidence for believing in them. There's tons of evidence. Clerics get spells, heck, even a handful of mortals actually ascended to godhood via the test of the starstone.
Beyond that, valuing scientific evidence above all else hardly even makes sense in a world where magic is so prevalent. Where magic is present, the scientific method breaks down, that would mean you can't have atheism rooted in observable evidence which makes the concept -as I pointed out earlier- an entirely different animal than any kind of atheism present in our world.
You might be able to do a strain of something like: Those that are called gods aren't really gods, but actually powerful outsiders, no different in principle than any mortal -as evidenced by Iomedae, Norgerber, Aroden, etc-: therefore there are no gods. At that point you're just quibbling over semantics though. Whats really the difference between a god and a very powerful outsider that grants power to mortals and stands for an ideal and acts like a god? Again, this is so totally different from "real" atheism that it can't even be called the same thing.
In short: If you think you can possibly mesh these two together, either you dont understand how Golarion works, or you don't understand how atheism works.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
There is the Rahadoumi anti-theism which I'm just itching to play a character with.
As far as athiesm, you could go with a more psionic outlook. Divine magic is just a special school of magic, unlocking and focusing a person's own talents by the peculiar insanity of faith. Summoned outsiders and other planes are just astral constructs given form by the subconscious, like a summoner's eidolon or an astral pocket.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Atheism is not the claim "gods don't exist." Atheism is a lack of FAITH in gods.
In our world, atheism is straightforward: there's no evidence that any gods exist, therefore atheists lack belief in them.
In Golarion, beings called gods clearly do exist. An atheist in Golarion is simply someone who lacks faith in them and doesn't worship any of them.
awp832 wrote: Beyond that, valuing scientific evidence above all else hardly even makes sense in a world where magic is so prevalent. Where magic is present, the scientific method breaks down, that would mean you can't have atheism rooted in observable evidence which makes the concept -as I pointed out earlier- an entirely different animal than any kind of atheism present in our world. "Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable FROM SCIENCE!"
awp832 wrote: You might be able to do a strain of something like: Those that are called gods aren't really gods, but actually powerful outsiders, no different in principle than any mortal -as evidenced by Iomedae, Norgerber, Aroden, etc-: therefore there are no gods. At that point you're just quibbling over semantics though. Whats really the difference between a god and a very powerful outsider that grants power to mortals and stands for an ideal and acts like a god? Again, this is so totally different from "real" atheism that it can't even be called the same thing. The same difference between an actual god and aliens with superscience?
Also, there's the worship bit and how that power is used.
Philosophically there's a similarity in some respects with a subset of atheists in real life that at least has one member.
awp832 wrote: Atheism wouldn't exist in Golarion. That's an opinion. I have several atheist characters I've played in the Golarion setting, and I've had several devote, an anti-theist, and several who really don't care one way or the other, but accept what is.
Same with several other settings, I've had all kinds of characters and faiths.
Edit: I should add trying to say why something is can group everyone into a single category. Not everyone is the same. The characters I have are who they are for lots of different reasons, same as people in real life.
Have them point out the evil even the good Gods have committed and say the price of worship is too high.
Have them say Gods are Tyrannical Monarchs unworthy of worship.
Silence among Hounds wrote: Have them point out the evil even the good Gods have committed and say the price of worship is too high.
Have them say Gods are Tyrannical Monarchs unworthy of worship.
Also, if a god wants to do good, why does it need a bunch of mortals worshipping it and talking about how great it is? Just what kind of ridiculously vain being is it?
If YOU had a bunch of super powers and could grant super powers to other people, would you demand they make temples to you, pray to you, worship you, etc? Would that be ethical?
A: "There are gods"
B: "No there aren't"
A: "But clerics channel their power"
B: "No they don't"
Addendum to B: Look, the cleric in the temple wriggles his fingers around and says some funny words and someone's wounds close up. My friends an apprentice mage, he says some funny words and wriggles his hands around and fire comes out of his fingers. Heck, the guy singing in the blue mermaid can SING your wounds closed, no gods required.
Just because they SAY their power comes from a god doesn't mean that it does. Magic is real and there's a lot of different ways of doing it.
This happens to be WRONG but its not insane. Lots of people believe in unreal things all the time.
Set wrote: In a fantasy world, someone who doesn't believe that the various gods *don't exist* has a hard row to hoe. It's more difficult, true, but the existence of non-divine magic makes it very possible. A "god" might just be an extremely powerful wizard/sorcerer or something akin to that. Akin to, oh, say, Razmir the Living God.
Kthulhu wrote: Set wrote: In a fantasy world, someone who doesn't believe that the various gods *don't exist* has a hard row to hoe. It's more difficult, true, but the existence of non-divine magic makes it very possible. A "god" might just be an extremely powerful wizard/sorcerer or something akin to that. Akin to, oh, say, Razmir the Living God. Is there actually anything that distinguished "powerful wizard/sorcerer" or more likely "powerful outsider" from "god"?
Razmir can't grant spells, I believe, so there's that.
But some non-deity outsiders can.
Cult of Vorg: If you want to do that, fine. But that's not atheism. That's lack of religion. The Rhahadoum saw religion was tearing their city apart and abolished it because it was bad for their city. It's not that they don't believe in the gods.
Calybos1: You don't understand atheism. Atheism absolutely IS the claim "gods don't exist."
Drachasor: 2nd claim: presicely. A person who says "there are no gods, but there is one benevolent alien born of a virgin who has magic powers and uses them to benefit humanity" is no atheist. Whether he calls it a god or an alien is irrelevant.
MrSin: anti-theism is not atheism. Those who "don't really care one way or the other" aren't atheist either. An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in gods. At all. I'm not saying you *couldnt* make a character who saw the world that way, but it would be a nonsensical viewpoint. Your character would be a madman (or madwoman).
Anyone saying something such as: "gods don't deserve worship." that is also not atheism.
thejeff wrote: Razmir can't grant spells, I believe, so there's that. There's no real way for most people to know that, since he has robed mooks , bards, and and alchemists faking it for him, as well as an active campaign of misinformation.
And he leveled a city overnight.
awp832 wrote: Cult of Vorg: If you want to do that, fine. But that's not atheism. That's lack of religion. The Rhahadoum saw religion was tearing their city apart and abolished it because it was bad for their city. It's not that they don't believe in the gods.
Calybos1: You don't understand atheism. Atheism absolutely IS the claim "gods don't exist."
Drachasor: 2nd claim: presicely. A person who says "there are no gods, but there is one benevolent alien born of a virgin who has magic powers and uses them to benefit humanity" is no atheist. Whether he calls it a god or an alien is irrelevant.
MrSin: anti-theism is not atheism. Those who "don't really care one way or the other" aren't atheist either. An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in gods. At all. I'm not saying you *couldnt* make a character who saw the world that way, but it would be a nonsensical viewpoint. Your character would be a madman (or madwoman).
Anyone saying something such as: "gods don't deserve worship." that is also not atheism.
So is belief in "magic powers" sufficient to not be atheist?
Or "aliens", since you use that example? In the Star Trek universe, is someone who has met and thus believes in Q not an atheist?
BigNorseWolf wrote: thejeff wrote: Razmir can't grant spells, I believe, so there's that. There's no real way for most people to know that, since he has robed mooks , bards, and and alchemists faking it for him, as well as an active campaign of misinformation.
And he leveled a city overnight. True, but it doesn't really answer the question of what is the distinguishing factor.
Other than having "God" in your stat block, anyway.
awp832 wrote: Drachasor: 2nd claim: presicely. A person who says "there are no gods, but there is one benevolent alien born of a virgin who has magic powers and uses them to benefit humanity" is no atheist. Whether he calls it a god or an alien is irrelevant. Yeah they are, since they're saying gods don't exist. So the claim is 100% relevant. Especially since the definition of what a "god" is can get quite circular and when it isn't, it is arbitrary. One could call a 20th level Wizard a god easily enough.
So yeah, pretty relevant.
awp832 wrote: Anyone saying something such as: "gods don't deserve worship." that is also not atheism. They are if they say "a god is something that deserves worship" and "these things people claim are gods don't deserve worship." That gets you back into the definition of what a god is, which again, is pretty much worthless in D&D. Unless you just define it for D&D and say it is someone with a power level over 9000, but then that's rather arbitrary.
thejeff wrote: Razmir can't grant spells, I believe, so there's that. Actually there are a few ways for PC classes to be able to grant spells. "Imbue with Spell Ability" is one, and a wizard could make a wondrous item, staff, or wand with this (And use the latter two with UMD). Heck, they could make it pretty inherent with a magic tattoo. So the difference is really one of scale.
A-theism, grammatically speaking, is the opposite of Theism. So that brings up the question, "What is 'Theism'?" Theism refers to there being a divine creator that interacts with and makes thamself known to tham's creation. Note, I use the third-person singular pronoun 'tham' (a contraction of 'that I am') to refer to such a deity of indeterminate/inconsequential gender. So the principal of Theism is that a deity exists and interacts with us in some fashion. The opposite, Atheism, could refer either to the state that a creator exists but doesn't interact (Deism) or that no such entity exists at all and the universe either came into being with no interaction or the universe has always existed.
So, in a world in which divine beings exist with certainty and interact with mortals, you have a couple of different possibilities.
A) Ignorance. The "no they aren't" approach. Since, in the context of the fantasy world in question, "Gods" are as much a fact as a spherical world, claiming that they "don't exist" is equitable to claiming the Earth is flat. There are people like that, in both historic and contemporary contexts. They'd probably just view Divine magic as just a special branch of Arcane magic.
B) God over the anthill. They're powerful beings, but that's all. They didn't create the universe, but they are still very powerful beings, possibly denizens of a higher dimension. We can interact with them in certain ways, but there's nothing "supernatural" about them; they just represent another aspect of the structure of the universe but are otherwise lifeforms with their own quirks, flaws, and motives.
C) Deus ex Machina. They may not be Gods themselves, but they are agents of such a being. They may not even be sentient but their actions are highly complex in a way that mortals could easily confuse for actual self-awareness. They could be more like a part of the operating structure of the universe that mortals have found various methods of "hacking" for their own purposes.
D) Multifaceted Unity. They are aspects of a singular "God" being, each being a small facet of a higher-dimensional being which actually did create the universe. So to refer to one in particular as a theistic deity is insufficient since that's like referring to your left thumb as an entire person.
E) Quantum Actualization. Gods are metaphysical manifestations of our own quantum experience. They're a higher degree of "mind-over-matter" and Clerics and other divine casters aren't "calling on" divine power but rather, creating it themselves on a subconscious level to such a level that the collective quantum experience of multiple individuals coalesces into the equivalent of a sentient entity that represents the average of the "believers'" attitudes.
Gods aren't necessarily creators, Kazaan. And if a spellcaster makes a sentient race, does that make them a god? I don't think so.
So I think being a creator is both not necessary and not sufficient to be a god.
Kazaan wrote: A-theism, grammatically speaking, is the opposite of Theism. man do I hate that argument. In-flammable, grammatically speaking, is the opposite of flamable. While roots are often a good rule of thumb for finding the definition of the word, it's not a catch all, and it doesn't apply in this case. Deism is not a form of athiesm.
thejeff: sort-of, but not really. this is part of what makes being an athiest in Golarion so inconcievable. Athiests aren't just athiests so that they can be contrary. Atheists believe in the power of science to explain the universe. A belief in magic powers isn't technically sufficient to make you person of faith, it just undermines the atheist worldview if magic actually exists.
It's hard to say things like: "you can't have been born of a virgin, that's not the way the universe works" when things like Reincarnate and the Wish spell are around. Probably if some wizard wanted to design an "Impregnate" spell, they could.
Not terribly familiar with star trek but, maybe? Does Q use magic? I know he does some rather unexplainable things. Is this actual magic? Or is it some sort of quasi-sciency stuff? I believe its supposed to be the latter, if I remember correctly. There are rules to the universe, and Q must obey them, though it may seem to Picard and the others as if he is not. In this case, there is no magic. Regardless, we ought to be careful about what we talk about where Star Trek is concered as it is after all, another fictional universe.
Drachasor: I'm guessing I didn't quite get my point about the powerful alien across. I was specifically referring to a theoretical person who lists off all the characteristics of a Christian God and calls him an alien. Is this person better qualified as an athiest or a Christian? I would say a Christian.
|
1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
|
awp832 wrote: Not terribly familiar with star trek but, maybe? Does Q use magic? I know he does some rather unexplainable things. Is this actual magic? Or is it some sort of quasi-sciency stuff? I believe its supposed to be the latter, if I remember correctly. There are rules to the universe, and Q must obey them, though it may seem to Picard and the others as if he is not. In this case, there is no magic. Regardless, we ought to be careful about what we talk about where Star Trek is concered as it is after all, another fictional universe. "Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from magic."
"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from SCIENCE!"
Magic has rules too, yo.
awp832 wrote: Drachasor: I'm guessing I didn't quite get my point about the powerful alien across. I was specifically referring to a theoretical person who lists off all the characteristics of a Christian God and calls him an alien. Is this person better qualified as an athiest or a Christian? I would say a Christian. Technically, you did the checkmarks for Christ, which a 9th level Cleric could do (or 9th level Wizard with enough prep).
And my point was that it depends on your definition of what a god is, which fundamentally depends on what you mean by "divine." If you say a god is a being that should be worshipped, then you're going to have some that say such beings don't exist because they can't exist -- even if you tick off whatever properties you want and we pretend they all can be proven true.
And being a christian requires a certain (somewhat mutable) belief set, which someone that claims such a being is not a god would not have. So no, they wouldn't be a christian. If they don't believe it is a god, then they'd still be an atheist.
Or are you saying someone that sincerely believe their pet cat is a god and that no other gods exist is an atheist? Just because you might think someone is wrong doesn't change whether they are an atheist or not.
Thanks guys for your advice, I think I'll portray them in differing lights including miso-theism, belief that divine magic is really just magic or that they believe the gods are just another form of outsiders.
awp832 wrote:
In short: If you think you can possibly mesh these two together, either you dont understand how Golarion works, or you don't understand how atheism works.
I have no in-depth knowledge of Golarion but I was merely talking about the Greycloaks (the guards of Absolom) who are (by the info from guide to Absolom) definitely atheist. I understand that atheism is out of place in many settings but since the Greycloaks specifically were called out to be atheists I was wondering how that would be pulled off.
Also, you said "atheists believe in the power of science to explain the universe", possibly, but not a requirement to be an atheist. Magic's existance doesn't mean gods exist, just that magic exists.
awp832 wrote:
thejeff: sort-of, but not really. this is part of what makes being an athiest in Golarion so inconcievable. Athiests aren't just athiests so that they can be contrary. Atheists believe in the power of science to explain the universe. A belief in magic powers isn't technically sufficient to make you person of faith, it just undermines the atheist worldview if magic actually exists.
It's hard to say things like: "you can't have been born of a virgin, that's not the way the universe works" when things like Reincarnate and the Wish spell are around. Probably if some wizard wanted to design an "Impregnate" spell, they could.
Not terribly familiar with star trek but, maybe? Does Q use magic? I know he does some rather unexplainable things. Is this actual magic? Or is it some sort of quasi-sciency stuff? I believe its supposed to be the latter, if I remember correctly. There are rules to the universe, and Q must obey them, though it may seem to Picard and the others as if he is not. In this case, there is no magic. Regardless, we ought to be careful about what we talk about where Star Trek is concered as it is after all, another fictional universe.
It's hard to say things like "You can't have been born of a virgin, that's not the way the universe works", when things like artificial insemination and test tube babies are around. :)
Atheists do not believe in Gods. That's it. Lack of belief in magic and belief that science can explain the universe commonly go along with that, but are not strictly part of it.
In a D&D/PF not believing in magic would be insane. There is plenty of hard evidence available. OTOH, it's pretty easy to classify it as simply following rules not completely understood.
That's actually why I brought Q up. In Star Trek he's treated as "quasi-sciency", essentially almost limitless psychic powers. Such an entity appearing in a fantasy world would likely be treated as a god. You're making a distinction between "quasi-sciency" and magic that isn't really meaningful. In most RPG universes, especially PF, magic and gods follow rules.
Drachasor wrote:
"Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from magic."
"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from SCIENCE!"
Magic has rules too, yo.
Yes you said that before. You're paraphrasing "Clarke's Law" which I put in quotes as Clarke was an author and not a scientist. However, Clarkes law does have some truth to it, and that's why it has become popular. The second part I'm guessing you just made up becuase you feel that it's clever. I hope you're not being serious in the claim. It doesn't make any sense. If it were true, than magic would be a kind of science, and not magic. A very cool concept to be sure, the sort of thing steampunkers love, and it has a place in my heart too... but that isn't the universe of Golarion. Magic is Magic. As far as "the rules of magic" .... like what, exactly?
Quote:
And my point was that it depends on your definition of what a god is, which fundamentally depends on what you mean by "divine."
I guess thats for the OP to decide. But if it were me, talking about a divine being in Golarion. Id say at a bare minimum it must be able to grant spells to a Cleric, it must have associated domains, and it must have a goal or associated philosophy. Worship is not a requirement.
Quote: are you saying someone that sincerely believe their pet cat is a god and that no other gods exist is an atheist? ...no, they'd be a Mr. Fluffers-ist. Or whatever. They'd not be an atheist. I don't know where you got that impression. If they believe in a god, they're not an atheist. Simple.
If you're still bent up on the alien thing, let me try to put the same point another way:
Does it matter of the name of God is, or Jehova, or Allah, or Yahweh? Or Zim? To quote shakespere: "A rose by any other name..."
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Drachasor wrote: "Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from magic."
"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from SCIENCE!"
My favorite variation, which is semantically equivalent to the first:
"Any science distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
cmastah wrote: If I successfully manage to get my group to pick up PFS, I was curious about how to play up atheism in PF. Given that there is clearly divine and arcane magic in the world, along with angels, demons, undead, so on and so forth, how am I supposed to make atheists work?
A: "There are gods"
B: "No there aren't"
A: "But clerics channel their power"
B: "No they don't"
A: "There are demons"
B: "No there aren't"
A: "But there's the worldwound"
B: "No such place"
A: "We can use magic to contact the gods and angels"
B: "I speak to them too, in the middle of a drunken stupor"
I honestly have no idea how to portray atheists in a fantasy setting where you can contact divine beings as early as level 3. Agnosticism I can understand, but I'm worried about making the Greycloaks look like fools.
(This is not a thread to discuss religion, please keep the real world out of this thread and please open your own if you want to bring in all of those arguments with you, this is PURELY an in-game quandary)
While Demons are extraplanar creatures, there is nothing religious about extraplanar creatures. Elementals are extraplanar and there is nothing religious about them. The same thing with Gods, they are simply extraplanar creatures, the fact that some people worship them as Gods, does not make them Gods. It only makes people delusional.
There are clerics that do not worship a God and they can do the same thing that clerics that worship an alleged God do.
awp832 wrote: Drachasor wrote:
"Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from magic."
"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from SCIENCE!"
Magic has rules too, yo.
Yes you said that before. You're paraphrasing "Clarke's Law" which I put in quotes as Clarke was an author and not a scientist. However, Clarkes law does have some truth to it, and that's why it has become popular. The second part I'm guessing you just made up becuase you feel that it's clever. I hope you're not being serious in the claim. It doesn't make any sense. If it were true, than magic would be a kind of science, and not magic. A very cool concept to be sure, the sort of thing steampunkers love, and it has a place in my heart too... but that isn't the universe of Golarion. Magic is Magic. As far as "the rules of magic" .... like what, exactly? The rulebooks go over a bunch of rules for magic. Books on deities typically go over some rules even they follow. Etc, etc. There are lots of rules and implied rules with how magic works.
It's a pity you don't get the reference regarding my second quote. It's from Girl Genius.
awp832 wrote: Quote:
And my point was that it depends on your definition of what a god is, which fundamentally depends on what you mean by "divine."
I guess thats for the OP to decide. But if it were me, talking about a divine being in Golarion. Id say at a bare minimum it must be able to grant spells to a Cleric, it must have associated domains, and it must have a goal or associated philosophy. Worship is not a requirement.
Almost everyone has a goal or associated philosophy. Even wizards can grant spells with the right prep and item/feats. And a domain is just a special sort of granted powers/prep. You're classifying a lot of demons as gods, btw, when in game terms they aren't called that.
My point though, is that it isn't a matter of how YOU define what a god is. It is a matter of how the atheist does. If he's more particular about his definition than you, then that's up to him. But since wizards can do a lot of the stuff "gods" can do, just on a smaller level, there's really only a difference of scale.
awp832 wrote: Quote: are you saying someone that sincerely believe their pet cat is a god and that no other gods exist is an atheist? ...no, they'd be a Mr. Fluffers-ist. Or whatever. They'd not be an atheist. I don't know where you got that impression. If they believe in a god, they're not an atheist. Simple.
Let's say this person lives in Galorian and doesn't believe his cat has clerics or can grant spells. Does that help my point?
awp832 wrote: If you're still bent up on the alien thing, let me try to put the same point another way:
Does it matter of the name of God is, or Jehova, or Allah, or Yahweh? Or Zim? To quote shakespere: "A rose by any other name..."
You're assuming the antecedent.
Vod Canockers wrote: While Demons are extraplanar creatures, there is nothing religious about extraplanar creatures. Elementals are extraplanar and there is nothing religious about them. The same thing with Gods, they are simply extraplanar creatures, the fact that some people worship them as Gods, does not make them Gods. It only makes people delusional.
There are clerics that do not worship a God and they can do the same thing that clerics that worship an alleged God do.
Not in PFS. And officially not in Golarion.
Though I've got an idea for an atheist Oracle kicking around the back of my head. He's been picked by one of the standard gods and he's pissed about it.:)
awp832 wrote: Does it matter if the name of God is, or Jehova, or Allah, or Yahweh? Or Zim? To quote Shakespeare: "A rose by any other name..." It doesn't to some, but others get upset about it (in degrees ranging from 'please don't offend my beliefs' to 'Inquisition time!')
Back on track: Others have pointed out all sorts of philosophies that render 'non-believers' compatible with Golarion, as long as they don't try to bum any divine spells off a god while they're busy refuting deityhood. I always assumed these people existed, since the iconic Ezren has been one of 'em since Pathfinder #1.
BigNorseWolf wrote: A: "There are gods"
B: "No there aren't"
A: "But clerics channel their power"
B: "No they don't"
Addendum to B: Look, the cleric in the temple wriggles his fingers around and says some funny words and someone's wounds close up. My friends an apprentice mage, he says some funny words and wriggles his hands around and fire comes out of his fingers. Heck, the guy singing in the blue mermaid can SING your wounds closed, no gods required.
Just because they SAY their power comes from a god doesn't mean that it does. Magic is real and there's a lot of different ways of doing it.
This happens to be WRONG but its not insane. Lots of people believe in unreal things all the time.
Yeah, pretty much this.
"But clerics cast spells!"
"So do I."
"But clerics get their spells from gods!"
"Because they say so? What if I say I get my spells from singing cartoon animals that you oh-so-conveniently will never be able to see or hear or feel, and that you should obey the directives of these singing cartoon animals, as handed down to you by me, since you can't hear them, and pay me money for the service of telling you what they are saying? Does that mean singing cartoon animals actually exist? What if I even *believe* that I get my spells from singing cartoon animals? Does that make me right, or just insane?"
Set wrote: Yeah, pretty much this.
"But clerics cast spells!"
"So do I."
"But clerics get their spells from gods!"
"Because they say so? What if I say I get my spells from singing cartoon animals that you oh-so-conveniently will never be able to see or hear or feel, and that you should obey the directives of these singing cartoon animals, as handed down to you by me, since you can't hear them, and pay me money for the service of telling you what they are saying? Does that mean singing cartoon animals actually exist? What if I even *believe* that I get my spells from singing cartoon animals? Does that make me right, or just insane?"
Or more like:
"I can give that little boy over there spells, that's doesn't make ME a god."
thejeff wrote:
It's hard to say things like "You can't have been born of a virgin, that's not the way the universe works", when things like artificial insemination and test tube babies are around. :)
lol. Ok, do I really have to add to that statement: "... can't have been born of a virgin, that wasn't the way things worked on planet earth in the year 0 CE."
Quote:
Atheists do not believe in Gods. That's it. Lack of belief in magic and belief that science can explain the universe commonly go along with that, but are not strictly part of it.
agree 100%.
However for the position to be tenneble, that's not good enough. They'd have to do a series of explainations which are difficult to do without invoking a diety.
They'd have to explain how divine magic works (special school of arcane magic)?
They'd have to explain why; when Aroden died, his followers could no longer use their magic.
They'd have to explain the Starstone, and what happens to those who complete the test.
They'd have to explain why a powerful cleric who falls to evil would suddenly his ability to cast magic.
They'd have to explain what accounts for the differences between how divine and arcane magic works (different spell lists, etc)
What exactly are sacred/profane bonuses?
Why would an entire race of beings known for being both Lawful and Good (Archons) repeatedly lie about the existence of gods they claim to serve, such as Torag, or Iomedae?
Demon lords are basically indistinguishable form gods. Asmodeous is a god. Lamashtu is a god. If your wizard is immortal (that should be a requirement too, at least the sense of no natural death), can grant spells to a cleric, can grant domain powers, then yes, he is a god too. A rose by any other name.
If you disagree then I ask you; what distinguishes a god from a really powerful outsider or "mortal"?
I guess if we're going to just talk in game terms, it says so in the book?
Ok, then I put forth than anybody in the world with at least 1 rank in Knowledge religion would automatically know that the dieties in the book are in fact, dieties.
awp832 wrote: thejeff wrote:
It's hard to say things like "You can't have been born of a virgin, that's not the way the universe works", when things like artificial insemination and test tube babies are around. :)
lol. Ok, do I really have to add to that statement: "... can't have been born of a virgin, that wasn't the way things worked on planet earth in the year 0 CE." "...to human science at the time."
Assuming no Parthenogenesis.
awp832 wrote: Quote:
Atheists do not believe in Gods. That's it. Lack of belief in magic and belief that science can explain the universe commonly go along with that, but are not strictly part of it.
agree 100%.
However for the position to be tenneble, that's not good enough. They'd have to do a series of explainations which are difficult to do without invoking a diety.
They'd have to explain how divine magic works (special school of arcane magic)?
They'd have to explain why; when Aroden died, his followers could no longer use their magic.
They'd have to explain the Starstone, and what happens to those who complete the test.
They'd have to explain why a powerful cleric who falls to evil would suddenly his ability to cast magic.
They'd have to explain what accounts for the differences between how divine and arcane magic works (different spell lists, etc)
What exactly are sacred/profane bonuses?
Why would an entire race of beings known for being both Lawful and Good (Archons) repeatedly lie about the existence of gods they claim to serve, such as Torag, or Iomedae?
Not true. To believe there are explanations for things does not require that you have all the explanations for everything. That's a ridiculous standard to hold anyone to.
And again, wizards and other casters can grant spell-casting to people in a limited fashion.
we're not talking all of lifes deepest questions here. We're talking about a huge amout that nobody can come up with an answer for. A lot of these things are practically every-day occurances in Golarion.
I feel the case of the Archons is particularly damning.
awp832 wrote: Demon lords are basically indistinguishable form gods. Asmodeous is a god. Lamashtu is a god. If your wizard is immortal (that should be a requirement too, at least the sense of no natural death), can grant spells to a cleric, can grant domain powers, then yes, he is a god too. A rose by any other name.
If you disagree then I ask you; what distinguishes a god from a really powerful outsider or "mortal"?
I guess if we're going to just talk in game terms, it says so in the book?
Ok, then I put forth than anybody in the world with at least 1 rank in Knowledge religion would automatically know that the dieties in the book are in fact, dieties.
Knowing something is commonly called a god is not the same thing as believing that it is valid to call them such.
Again, it is a matter of definition. The atheist stance can easily be that having a bunch of power doesn't mean you are a god. It doesn't mean temples should be built to you. It doesn't mean you should be worshipped. Etc, etc.
Because I think "worship" is a pretty huge component of being a god, and you are leaving that out.
|
