Ilbranteloth
Explorer
The question is why would you preserve the wall. It presumes the PC wants to tear down the wall and that, as a DM, you can make that possible if you want. You've ceded that such PC's and campaigns could exist. If such a PC came to your game, why would you choose not to let them succeed? What do you gain from such a choice compared to the cost of losing player autonomy? What is the benefit?
The above are all reasons why someone could not. Remove those barriers (as DMs can). Why, then, would you still preserve it (if you would)?
For instance, imagine a Dragonborn elder who was raised from the dead by a powerful Dragonborn bard, saved from the Fugue Plane. That elder knows what lies in store, and knows its unjust. This PC - a dragonborn apprentice of that great bard - follows in that elder's tradition, seeking an afterlife for herself and her people and all unbelievers that is just and righteous. As the party delves into ancient ruins and explores the history of the gods and other worlds, they see the possibilities layed out before them - afterlives where everyone receives justice.
This plot works, no? So why WOULDN'T you allow it? What do you gain from forbidding it?
(in the Star Wars analogy, you might as well say that Leia could not succeed because the Rebellion is small and most people go along with the Empire and don't challenge it and think that the only people that get their planets blown up are those who fight the way things are - but the player came with a character who wanted to overthrow the Empire, and the DM made that possible for that character when for any other character, it wouldn't be possible. What do you gain as a DM by saying "The Empire cannot be overthrown in my campaign"?)
The Wall causes pain and suffering (and unnecessarily so, given that alternatives canonically exist).
These aren't gods that anyone had to have faith/belief in, though.
It is, because the just concept of Hell relies on monotheism and a transcendent deity that represents all that is good and loving in the world. FR has no such deity, no such monotheism, so for it to try and grab Hell makes it an unjust Hell compared to the Hell that lots of people here in the Real World believe in.
The justice available to Hell is not available to the Wall.
It does if some person chooses to make tornadoes and earthquakes. That's the nature of FR - either Ao or some god chooses to inflict this suffering. That makes it evil.
If you replace it with the D&D standard, that's not at all what that means.
Standard D&D doesn't either and it gets away with not requiring worship.
It really sounds like you don't understand the standard D&D afterlife very well.
OK, first off I'll agree with I'm a Banana (still love that handle btw), and say that the wall is a horrible fate and punishment. As to whether it's evil or not has to do with whether it's avoidable or not. Or I guess, more specifically, could the good Gods do something about it.
I believe the answer to that is no.
There already are alternatives - becoming a devil or food and fodder for the demons. I don't think either of those sound like better options. Or acknowledging the Gods. See, the thing is, in a world where the Gods don't show themselves, and don't provide powers to clerics, paladins and such (like the original Dragonlance series), being a non-believer is one thing. But in a world where the Gods actually show themselves, grant powers to their clerics, where powerful creatures can actually go to the God's domain, and people can be resurrected and tell their story of the afterlife, then being a non-believer is a very different proposition. Denying their very existence is different than refusing to give them respect or fealty.
Part of why I like the way the Forgotten Realms cosmology works is specifically because the Gods are dependent upon the faith of their followers. It's an approach unique to the setting that also helps explain why the Gods would have any interest in granting divine power to clerics, paladins and such.
One thing that I think a lot of people assume is that the Gods demand worship. I don't think I've seen anything that indicates the Gods demand worship. This is one of the things where we differ right off the bat. I think that this arrangement is a good thing. It makes the Gods more accountable to the Realms, and it makes a more direct connection between the followers and the God. I also think that the nature of the Gods, their domains, and the afterlife is not determined by Ao or the Gods.
Rather, I think that like religion in any world, it's grown as a way to understand how the world, and the afterlife work. But this measure I think that the afterlife itself has been shaped by the belief of the Realmsfolk, not the other way around. Certainly some Gods existed prior to being venerated, but once Ao declared that they would be directly tied to their faithful there certainly hasn't been any drive for more worshipers.
Obviously the evil Gods may have done so, but it's usually the faithful that are charged with that job, particularly the clerics and such. But they naturally want to spread their faith because, well, they believe.
So the faithful power their respective Gods, domains, and their very afterlife, where to the faithless go? They have no domain, no patron, and no eternal life because there are no faithful providing the faith energy that's needed to power their eternal life.
If the Gods and the very afterlife is shaped by the faith of the Realmsfolk, then the Wall is also shaped by the faith of the Realmsfolk. If that's the case, then the Gods cannot change it, only the faithful can.
So if this is the cosmology of the Realms (or at least my Realms) why would I remove the barriers? They illustrate that as in life, there is strife in death. I've never, ever concerned myself with the afterlife for any characters, my focus is on building a believable world. It's is extremely common, if not universal, for religions to develop an afterlife that mirrors the material life in many ways. Wars, theft, deceit, petty feuds, and more between the Gods. Gods that are fallible, vengeful, jealous, and not all-powerful. Eternal paradise for the faithful, damnation or some other punishment for the unfaithful. This is a cosmology uniquely tied to a Realm where magic and monsters exist, the Deities provide some assistance, and occasionally make their presence known more directly. If not this, then the civilized creatures of the world would have developed some other cosmology. The writers at TSR and WotC have developed a cosmology that's interesting and unique, as well as uniquely wondrous and horrifying at the same time.
I don't think the Star Wars comparison works at all. The Empire was powerful, but it was still mortals against mortals. Extraplanar creatures alone are a step above mortals, and the Gods are well beyond the power of most mortals to comprehend. One of the biggest mistakes (that I think even Gygax admitted) was to provide stats for the Gods in the original Deities and Demigods. Instead of them being untouchable beings of unfathomable power, they became just more powerful monsters. Even Lord of the Rings because while Sauron is a much higher order than Gandalf and other Istari, they are still effectively immortal, and with the combined forces of the elves the power shifted against Sauron.
Yes, in the Realms mortals have risen to be a God, and Gods have been destroyed by mortals, but only under very specific circumstances, most of which cannot be repeated since Ao now reserves the power to raise a being to Godhood (so no more Knucklebones), and the majority of deicides other than the Time of Troubles itself have been at the hands of other Deities. And even those have been far from permanent.
Changing that cosmology isn't just a matter of going to the Fugue Plain and killing a God. You would have to change the beliefs of the majority if not all of the Realmsfolk. And even that may not be enough, because you have the other Gods to contend with, as well as the faith power of all in their domains.
Most of my campaigns take years to get to 10th level. I'm not 'forbidding' it, I'm just saying that it will never happen in my world. It's not a story I'm interested in writing, on many levels, nor do I feel any need to. I don't have this need to make my fantasy afterlife all fun and games. Religion and religious beliefs, even in a world where the Gods are known to exist, are a mix of what is known, and what is unknown. Even with people returning from the Fugue Plain, the 'facts' are largely missing, and it's the job of the religions to fill in the facts. The job of the temples is to help recruit more faithful, and thus the lessons they teach, and the parables they preach will put their Deity in the best light. Of course that probably does little to clear up what really happens in the afterlife. And that makes sense to me.
The story of the Wall of Faithless is part of the religious and cosmological nature of the Realms. That doesn't mean that it's 100% correct. And characters in my campaign probably won't ever find out.
In a world where the faith powers the Gods' very existence, and by extension their domains and the afterlife of their followers, I don't necessarily see being punished for being unfaithful, for not following the rules, for putting oneself above that of the very cosmology itself, as being unjust.
However, I reserve that perspective for my campaign. I'm not saying everybody has to buy into it, and you're idea of trying to change the cosmology sounds like it could be a very interesting story and campaign as well. Just not one that I'd write.
Ilbranteloth