D&D 5E [Forgotten Realms] The Wall of the Faithless

[Ilbranteloth]

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

 

[I'm A Banana]

Why wouldnt the raised Dragonborn instead say 'the Gods are real, there are realms beyond this that they control where all ones desires can be met, but if you do not believe in them, you fade to nothing.'

A true 'born again' would certainly seem to go that way when confronted with the reality of the various Powers no?

Did you read Erin M. Evan's take a few pages back?

It's not like the dragonborn are going around saying "the gods don't exist," it is like they are going around saying "gods are like needy children and you don't need to give them your attention." Returning from the Fugue doesn't make that later statement untrue, it just gives those needy children the ability to put your soul into a Wall instead of embarrassing you by throwing a tantrum in the store. It makes them dangerously powerful needy children.

One logical response is to capitulate to these powerful needy children.

A more heroic response is to blow up the Wall.

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 can't really disagree more with the part I put in bold.

To keep using the Star Wars Analogy, that's like saying Vader blowing up Alderaan isn't evil, because Alderaan could just fight the Rebellion and be loyal to the Empire and thus avoid the fate of being blown up.

To use a more D&D analogy, it's like saying summoning Tiamat isn't evil, because people could just agree to be ruled by her and thus avoid the horrible things she would do to them.

We also don't think like this in the Real World - if you get into an argument with someone and they punch you, it doesn't matter if you could've avoided the punch by not arguing with them, they're still responsible for their own actions (and guilty of assault). There's no system of morality or religion that would say that the one who threw the punch isn't committing some form of sin.

Whether something can be avoided or not is irrelevant for it's moral abhorrence (and bleeds into things like victim-blaming, where we say it's your fault you got punched because you could've just not argued and thus YOU'RE guilty of provoking him to assault!), and for it's Evil-ness in D&D terms.

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 the arc of a fight against the Wall in your FR is about convincing people to believe in something different - an afterlife where if you believed in yourself or your friends or an abstract concept like Peace, you could still go there, because there would be belief creating this world where you and your friends can live in peace.

Very Planescape-y.

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 mean, mostly you would remove the Wall because you're Saying Yes to an idea the player brought in and is interested in exploring. It's not like everything is hunky-dory in the afterlife of standard D&D without the wall (as the fights against demon lords and the like show). You can include strife in death without the Wall.

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.

The gods of the Realms aren't transcendent beings. They're powerful magical individuals. Some of them are ascended mortals who have killed gods. They're more like the polytheistic pantheons. And in those pantheons, you clearly had thunderstorms without Zeus (because it's not like there weren't thunderstorms in Persia!), so belief was irrelevant.

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.

Then you're forbidding it. It will never happen in your games.

I'm still not exactly clear on the benefit you gain from disallowing it.

 

[Scribe]

I'm reading Erin's books now (great btw imo!) and one member of one race that is in the majority atheist doesnt really strike me as the most reasoned argument against the Powers and their place in the Multiverse.

To me, the Wall is the Powers way of saying to their food source 'You do not get to accept our favour, and then ditch us in the end.'

I think its an unlikely scenario anyway, against outside the Dragonborn stance most other characters/races/people seem fine with the status quo, but there it is.

Something else that bugs me about all this is, what about your classical Anti-Hero? He's going Good. Perhaps more Good than anyone else in his immediate area/lifetime, but in the end its for selfish, tyrannical reasons (Bane, Lawful Evil to the core).

Should he get a free pass as someone who did Good in the Realms? After all, why not weigh up his contributions, and say 'Yes you did good, see you on Mount Celestia' or where he chooses as a Free God Denying Soul, to go where he pleases?

The Wall is the final road block to a Souls ability to dictate where it goes. Good, Bad, whatever, you are going to be Judged, and if you refuse to be, you go to the Wall.

Isnt that kind of the point here? If you are Good, would you not want to go to a Good Plane to live out your eternity? Why would you deny it, just to sit around the Fugue?

 

[Ilbranteloth]

As to whether it's evil or not has to do with whether it's avoidable or not.O r I guess, more specifically, could the good Gods do something about it.

I can't really disagree more with the part I put in bold.

To keep using the Star Wars Analogy, that's like saying Vader blowing up Alderaan isn't evil, because Alderaan could just fight the Rebellion and be loyal to the Empire and thus avoid the fate of being blown up.

To use a more D&D analogy, it's like saying summoning Tiamat isn't evil, because people could just agree to be ruled by her and thus avoid the horrible things she would do to them.

We also don't think like this in the Real World - if you get into an argument with someone and they punch you, it doesn't matter if you could've avoided the punch by not arguing with them, they're still responsible for their own actions (and guilty of assault). There's no system of morality or religion that would say that the one who threw the punch isn't committing some form of sin.

Whether something can be avoided or not is irrelevant for it's moral abhorrence (and bleeds into things like victim-blaming, where we say it's your fault you got punched because you could've just not argued and thus YOU'RE guilty of provoking him to assault!), and for it's Evil-ness in D&D terms.

You totally misunderstood my point. The line immediately following it was meant to clarify, but obviously didn't. A tornado causes suffering, but is not evil because it is a natural occurrence and cannot be avoided. I cannot make the tornado go away no matter how hard I try. I'm not saying it's not evil because that victim could or couldn't avoid it.

I'm saying that if the Gods are incapable of destroying the wall, if they don't have any way to do so, because the natural laws of the cosmology prevents it, then they can not be considered evil simply because it exists, any more than I can be considered evil because tornadoes exist. They cannot be held accountable for something they can't change.

Likewise you can't consider Leia evil because she didn't stop Vader from destroying Alderaan. She couldn't do anything about it.

The gods of the Realms aren't transcendent beings. They're powerful magical individuals. Some of them are ascended mortals who have killed gods. They're more like the polytheistic pantheons. And in those pantheons, you clearly had thunderstorms without Zeus (because it's not like there weren't thunderstorms in Persia!), so belief was irrelevant.

Belief was irrelevant for Zeus. But it's not irrelevant in the Realms. The power of the Gods is linked to their followers faith.

Here's how Wikipedia defines Diety: In religious belief, a deity (Listeni/ˈdiː.ɨti/ or Listeni/ˈdeɪ.ɨti/)[1] is either a natural or supernatural being, who is thought of as holy, divine, or sacred. Some religions have one supreme deity, while others have multiple deities of various ranks.

I think the Gods of the Realms fit that definition precisely, as does Zeus. In the Realms it goes a step further because their power is dependent upon the faith of their followers. In addition, they have the ability to grant divine power to their most faithful.

Then you're forbidding it. It will never happen in your games.

I'm still not exactly clear on the benefit you gain from disallowing it.

And I'm not exactly clear on the benefit I gain if I do disallow it.

The benefit of allowing it is the same as anybody else who has it in their Realms campaign. It's a unique bit of lore that is tied specifically to the Realms. Once again, the fact that it exists in the religions and minds of the people of the Realms doesn't necessarily mean it actually exists.

And again I'm not forbidding it. I run games in the Forgotten Realms. I have no interest in running a game in Krynn. I'm not 'disallowing' or 'forbidding' a Dragonlance campaign. I'm just not picking up a book to run one myself. Who knows, when this campaign runs its course over the next couple of years, maybe I will. But I doubt it.

I have a number of stories in progress in my campaign. Those are the stories I'm writing. The fact that I'm not interested in spending what time I have writing a story that interests you doesn't mean I'm forbidding or disallowing it. I'm just not going there. Same end result perhaps, but telling me I am forbidding it implies an entirely different intent on my part, and I take offense to that.

I have no interest in taking my campaign into any extraplanar scenario.

I decide what I forbid or disallow. You nor anybody else get to decide what I forbid or not. I won't allow kender or gully dwarves. Giant Space Hamsters. In fact, the whole concept of Spelljammer. Those I forbid. They just don't exist in my Realms. Tried them, and at this stage in the game they are just out. I'm sure some player that loves kender will comment that I'm a racist as I've seen in threads elsewhere when their favorite race is disallowed. Whatever. It's a game. It's a fictional race, and in this case a fictional wall.

I'm still on the fence about dragonborn, at least in regards to the whole returned Abeir thing because I'm not sure if I'm including that either. Anything else, except for those things I expressly forbid, are simply things I'm not doing. I explained the likelihood of it ever happening was pretty much never, simply because I have a pretty good idea of what direction my campaign is heading, and an adventure to the Fugue Plain isn't part of what's planned. Perhaps if my interest was piqued enough I would. This thread, nor this discussion, has piqued my interest in running that type of campaign. Sorry.

The Wall exists, at least in the beliefs of the Realmsfolk of my Realms. If somebody writes a novel of somebody that destroys the Wall that fits within my Realms, then no problem, it becomes part of the campaign lore. If it's destroyed by gully dwarves, kender and a giant space hamster, then it probably won't make it into my campaign's lore. If it's part of a dragonborn and tiefling storyline, then I'm on the fence. It's probably more likely to make my campaign if Erin M Evans writes it, but on the other hand I'm really not a fan of the whole returned Abeir, nor the way dragonborn and tieflings are presented in the 5th edition. So who knows. I guess I don't have to worry about it until somebody writes the book.

I'm not here to try to convince you to run your campaign my way. You and others have asked how and why I and others approach the subject of the Wall in our Forgotten Realms campaign. I'm not sure why you continue to insist or imply that there is some problem with me not wanting to run a campaign specifically to destroy the wall. I've spent more time considering the wall in the last few days than in the last few decades. I love the discussion, I love threads that make me think. But it's not an interesting enough subject to me to do other than just think about it and discuss it. It's certainly helped me clarify how I think the Gods, their domains, the afterlife, and yes, even the wall works.

Ilbranteloth

 

[MonsterEnvy]

If you have it in you, you can thrive on the lower planes. Orcus certainly doesn't feel punished for his vile life if evil.

Orcus was punished. He was some evil soul that found himself going to the Abyss. Were he was transformed into a vile little creature and lost his personality and memory destroying whoever he used to be. He then proceeded to be one of the lucky vile little demons that clawed his way up to power and became a unique and powerful being. But nothing remains of the mortal who Orcus used to be.

In Hell it's worse, the souls that arrive are collected by their owners and brought to that layer of their owner were they are traded around as currency. While being tortured to extract divine energy from them, Once the soul has had all of the personality and divine energy tortured out of them and nothing more can be extracted they toss the soul shell into a birthing pit were anything that may have been left is destroyed as the soul melts into a Lemure before being fished out.

 

[Mecheon]

If somebody writes a novel of somebody that destroys the Wall that fits within my Realms, then no problem, it becomes part of the campaign lore.

I keep telling you man, NWN 2, Mask of the Betrayer

Its not quite Planescape: Torment (Which is, you know, one of the greatest games of all time and easily surpasses quite a few official novels), but its up there. And you don't destroy the Wall, but it does detail quite a few bits and bobs about it storyline wise

 

[Mirtek]

and lost his personality and memory destroying whoever he used to be.

the same happens to the souls in the upper planes

 

[MonsterEnvy]

the same happens to the souls in the upper planes

Not it all cases. For the gods their followers don't become part of the plane. In Mount Celestia it only happened if you climb to the very top of it. In places like the abyss it your being is erased and you are tormented during the process.

As in the Forgotten Realms you need to worship a god to get your soul to the outer planes no one merges with it. (Hades, Hell and the Abyss are exceptions to this. But they just take souls from the fugue plane.)

 

[Mirtek]

Not it all cases. For the gods their followers don't become part of the plane.

All petioners lose their memories by default. A few favored ones gain them back. Once a soul is distelled enough it merges with its plane or deity.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

I keep telling you man, NWN 2, Mask of the Betrayer

Its not quite Planescape: Torment (Which is, you know, one of the greatest games of all time and easily surpasses quite a few official novels), but its up there. And you don't destroy the Wall, but it does detail quite a few bits and bobs about it storyline wise

Very interesting. And a perfect example of how I handle 'canon.' There are a great many contradictions and such among the different sources (novels, sourcebooks, games, etc.). In terms of their 'in-game' use, they are all stories that are valid as news and such, but the actual facts may or may not be the same. According to written canon, the only way to enter the Fugue plain is the soul of somebody who died, or through a portal from Hell or the Abyss. This contradicts that, but that works fine since the mortal Realmsfolk really don't (and largely can't) know.

I liken them to news reports from different channels, or a better description would be eyewitness accounts from different people, which can vary widely and may be colored by hidden agendas, etc.

Just to be fair - NEVERWINTER NIGHTS 2 POSSIBLE SPOILER ALERT

But the idea of continuing crusades from within the planes, plus Kelemvor indicating that the Wall is essential to the order of the universe is very interesting. Although I'm sure some will point out that by this lore Myrkul created the wall, that occurred before Ao tied the Gods power directly to their followers, so that changed the nature of how the afterlife worked and the nature of the faithless.

Also note that the description in Faiths and Avatars says that 'those that firmly deny any faith' not just somebody who doesn't practice a faith will end up in the Wall. It also identifies all of the regions of the Realms, including Kara-Tur and Maztica, and their pantheons. While the 'Realms' pantheon is not universally known or venerated, all Realmsfolk have the same afterlife in terms of the Fugue Plain. But it calls out a few specific examples, such as Chult with two Powers, and a collection of spirits primarily regarding nature, as well as the philosophy of the lands of Durpar, Var the Golden and Estegund believing in a single Power (The One). In each of those regions, the particular pantheons and religions have dominion. Many of those, particularly in Kara-Tur, are more like philosophies than religions. Their perception of Gods or Powers is very different.

Yet they do not end up in the wall. Instead they go to their own afterlife - presumably via the Fugue Plain like all the other petitioners, and are gathered by agents of their faith, many of which may be nature spirits or something along those lines for religions or philosophies that don't venerate Powers.

So avoiding the Wall is based on faith not toward a specific Power (although it can be), but it also appears that it must be a faith of sufficient power itself. That is, it requires the collective power of many people who believe in the same thing. But a group large enough (how large?), most likely along with Ao's approval, apparently has the power to create their own afterlife to join after the visit to the Fugue Plain. Part of this approval would probably (although I'm not sure it's entirely necessary) provide a portion of the physical Realms as under their domain. So perhaps a unified religion or philosophy within a specific and significant enough geographical region is enough.

Ilbranteloth