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

[Scribe]

This thread has been very interesting, enough so that I felt compelled to register!

What the people of the Realms know or believe is up for interpretation, and will depend very much so on their exposure to Powers. Gods however in the sense of extremely powerful entities, that can influence the world in ways beyond even what a Wizard can do are an undeniable fact of life in the Realms.

As a framework for my own approach to Gods, Religion, and something as seemingly offensive as the Wall I have the following.

1. I am an atheist, a naturalist, and a nihilist.
2. In D&D (other than 4th which I skipped) I have always played something with a Divine background. Cleric, Paladin.
3. I believe the Gods of either the Core, or FR setting are completely central to the story, and have seen this since I cut my teeth as a kid many many years ago, on Dragonlance.
4. I was born into a Christian faith, and left when I was 14, with a LOT of flack from my family both immediate and extended.

So why is someone grounded in logic, and reality drawn to Gods and Fantasy? Well because its different from reality.

Reading some of the posts in the last few pages especially seems to illustrate some kind of offense at the Wall or atheist characters that is kind of mind boggling.

You are a God. It its 100% critical to your ongoing survival that people continue to believe in you. Its not enough to 'pay lip service' they need to believe it. There has to be a reason to drive worship, and just 'being a good god' isnt sufficient. There are many Gods, at conflicting ends of every spectrum you can imagine really, and so it stands to reason that one would be able to find a God that even if they do not worship, aligns with how they see the Realms. I would argue that its almost a given in fact. Either from racial bias, or cultural one, nearly everyone will find a God they can agree with on an impersonal level, and frankly thats enough.

I highly doubt every single person in the Realms is going to need to know the rulers of Mount Celestia, Bytopia, or Elysium, and simply will find that if they lead a 'Good Honest Life' then they will be attuned to those places or Gods.

The Wall, is very much a reflection of 'Deny me 3 times'. You have to TRY and get into the Wall. You have to look at a lifetime of proof, and deny that in the face of everything saying they are Gods, that they are. Just because they can die, or be forgotten, or be replaced, does not mean they are not Gods, it may just mean they are not like the Christian God, of our reality.

In a Fantastical setting such as the FR, it makes no sense, logically, to deny the existence of Gods, to deny one you are aligned with, even less so.

Then again, maybe Drizzt denies Mielikki in the end, and gets himself stuck in a Wall...but somehow I doubt it.

EDIT: And I wouldnt heal an Atheist PC either, I would 100% take that in character as an insult to my Faith, which is again grounded in reality.

 

[Hussar]

Just to unpack the example of the atheist character and the cleric a bit more.

The atheist character in FR is denying articles of faith. The cleric character has devoted his life to his faith, so much so that the gods have recognised this devotion and have granted him mystical powers to perform all sorts of acts. It's not wizard magic, it's divine. That's a fact, not simply an article of faith (as if articles of faith could ever be simple). The atheist character has the goal to tear down the wall. The last time this happened, bad things happened and the gods decreed that the Wall needed to be reinstated in order to bring order back to the setting. The atheist character is basically telling the cleric that, no, he (the atheist character) knows better than the gods and that the gods are wrong. Not only is that being insisted upon, but the atheist character expects the cleric to aid him in his quest to tear down the wall.

And this is a reasonable expectation? Really? The cleric is expected, despite the fact that the atheist character is denying the cleric's entire belief system, to render aid to the atheist character whenever needed? How is that even remotely believable? One time? Sure, that's mercy. Every time? Seriously? "Oh, but, the atheist character's player just wants to have fun". What about the theist character's player? Why is he being expected to play against the beliefs of his character? If you want to play an atheist character, that's fine. Go right ahead, but, don't expect the theist characters around you to just smile and nod and do whatever you like. That's ridiculous.
[MENTION=2067]I'm A Banana[/MENTION] mentioned the Dragonlance campaign he is in. I know that campaign. There are at least two devoted theist characters in that campaign who have been pretty vocal about their beliefs in the gods. This is a central tenet to those characters. I'maB's atheism hasn't come up in the campaign, and, frankly, I'm a little baffled by it to be honest. For one, it's a complete misreading and mischaracterisation of the events of Dragonlance and for two, we've actually MET one of the gods. Never minding that our entire campaign has been driven by theism - from bringing true faith back to the dwarves, to character gaining clerical powers to various enemies being of divine nature. Believing that the world of Krynn would be better off without the gods goes against the entire setting. In canon, it is the faithful characters, the Heroes of the Lance, which are the heroes of the setting. The one faithless character, Raistlin, is evil, full stop. Every example in the setting of faithless characters results in death, destruction and chaos. The basic theme of the setting is that the gods are necessary and that faith is a major force in healing the damage done by faithlessness.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Then again, maybe Drizzt denies Mielikki in the end, and gets himself stuck in a Wall...but somehow I doubt it.

Well Drizzt has not problems with the gods. So he can't be considered fiathless even if he did reject her. (Which he has shown no signs of doing.

 

[MG.0]

Ok, one last reply to this garbage and I'm done:

The cleric is expected, despite the fact that the atheist character is denying the cleric's entire belief system, to render aid to the atheist character whenever needed? How is that even remotely believable? One time? Sure, that's mercy. Every time? Seriously? "Oh, but, the atheist character's player just wants to have fun". What about the theist character's player? Why is he being expected to play against the beliefs of his character? If you want to play an atheist character, that's fine. Go right ahead, but, don't expect the theist characters around you to just smile and nod and do whatever you like. That's ridiculous.

Who said everything goes the atheist character's way? All players should be able to represent their character, and yet get along with the other characters in their group. It is trivially easy to play a party of diverse beliefs and alignments with no conflicts whatsoever if you keep in mind that the players' enjoyment comes first and you apply a little imagination instead of unyielding uninspired dogma about how real world religions work, blah, blah, blah.


You like quoting canon from various settings to support your idea of faith being paramount, yet ignore or fail to understand the lessons it clearly contains. Several times in Dragonlance and other settings we see clerical healing bestowed upon unbelievers. Many of the heroes of the lance had no particular faith, or even actively denied it, yet were not evil. The clerics did not deny them healing out of some perverse need to avoid aiding an unbeliever. ( You balk at every possible compromise or solution. That, despite the appearance you are trying to portray, clearly reveals your desire to punish players for their choice to play an unbeliever. )

In canon, it is the faithful characters, the Heroes of the Lance, which are the heroes of the setting. The one faithless character, Raistlin, is evil, full stop. Every example in the setting of faithless characters results in death, destruction and chaos. The basic theme of the setting is that the gods are necessary and that faith is a major force in healing the damage done by faithlessness.

Ultimately you feel the need to impose your interpretation of the importance of faith represented in a few novels and books on all players, regardless of their comfort level with religion in general.

Wow, you should start a church/cult...you're halfway there already.

Mod Note: Please don't make it personal. Address the content of the post, not the person of the poster. Thanks. ~Umbran

 

[hawkeyefan]

Hang on, how am I punishing the player? Note, although I wasn't clear, I was more thinking from the point of view of a fellow player, rather than the DM. If your character is a declared Faithless character, why would my priest heal him or have anything to do with him? (The character that is, not the other player, obviously) You have declared your character is an enemy of faith, that you would do anything in your power to destroy the creations of the gods and you don't believe the gods are worthy of worship. IOW, you have declared your character a heretic.

What would possibly motivate my theist character to help you in the slightest way? Why would my character not actually go out of his way to punish you? Why would ANY theist character see you as anything other than a horrid person in need of punishment? From a theist character's perspective, you're an eater of puppies. You're just about as evil as you could possibly be. You not only reject the other character's entire belief system, but, you also claim to want to destroy that belief system as well.



Why would the character get a "fair shot"? The character has decided and declared himself to be an enemy of faith. He's trying to destroy people's ways of life and actively working to destroy their belief system. What possible "fair shot" would you give this guy? If he succeeded, he could bring untold chaos on the world - the last time the Wall went away, it did exactly that. Nothing this person is going to do is going to help. This is a character with a bomb strapped to his chest trying to force the rest of the world to bow to his beliefs. Beliefs that are provably WRONG. The gods are not just "powerful wizards" in Forgotten Realms. They aren't. There is no bait and switch here. There is absolutely nothing the indicate that the gods are anything but gods.

So, again, why would any theist character aid this character. This character is destined for the worst punishment that the religion can inflict. Being Faithless is the greatest sin in this belief system. Nothing is worse. Even a mass murderer who eats puppies isn't denied an afterlife. Everyone gets an afterlife, of one flavour or another, except those who refuse to accept that the gods are actually gods. Don't have to actively worship them, particularly, just accept that, yup, that glowy person is a god.

Tell me again why this character would get a "fair shot".

Let's assume for the sake of argument that you're talking about a cleric of a truly good deity, and that the cleric is truly good as well.

Wouldn't such a person see doing good as it's own end? Wouldn't they see someone in pain and simply heal them because they can? Certainly there could be exceptions...it could be Manshoon or some other horrible person or whatever...of course. But let's go with the idea that the person in question is a PC who is of NG alignment, and was injured saving a village from an attack by Giants.

Why would a cleric of a good god not heal such a person? Does the cleric ask everyone whom he heals who their patron deity is? Would all clerics automatically share your stance that being faithless is somehow the highest sin possible? I doubt it. Perhaps they'd see them as misguided. Perhaps they'd see them as uninformed. Perhaps they'd see them as foolish. But as the highest example of evil? No way. Not when you have literally high priests of evil.

If the end all be all for the gods is simply a numbers game, then they are not actually upholding any concepts such as good or protection or anything like that....they're simply attaining followers in order to fuel themselves. And if that's the case, they don't exactly seem worthy of worship...which means being faithless is not as horrible as you describe.

Personally, my campaign is likely a bit different than most, but if I was playing it straight up as presented in the books, I'd probably treat it as I would anything else...people would have varying views on it. Including clerics. Why would they all have the same opinion on the topic?

 

[Saidoro]

There's a problem here where no one is even defining exactly what denying the gods even is. Because no one is defining what a god even is. What, precisely, is the difference between a god and a powerful wizard? What exact trait or set of traits can you point to about a god that makes them a god? If you want to build a god what is the simplest set of traits you can give it to have it qualify as a god? If a powerful wizard wanted to change themself into a god, what changes would they need to make to accomplish that?

With those answered, what in the definition of godhood makes it moral for them to force worship at threat of annihilation? What even is worship? If you had to teach your brand new sentient, ensouled construct how to do it what are the minimal set of things you need to teach it in order to qualify? What are the exact things a character needs to do to wind up in the wall of faithless? If you wanted to get your brand new worshipful construct into the wall what, exactly, would you need to do in order to accomplish that? What do you have to deny about the gods in order to get in the wall? What sets of external actions, if any, do you have to take or fail to take to qualify as denying the gods?

The moral status of the FR gods really kinda depends on these questions, as does the amount of sense that the setting makes as a whole.

 

[hawkeyefan]

[MENTION=6704530]Saidoro[/MENTION] Those are all good questions, and I think part of the problem is that almost none of them have definitive answers, even in canon. There are as many answers to most of those questions as there are people who would answer them.

I would say that in order to be considered a deity, you have to grant spells to your clerics. That seems to be the primary difference between a god and simply a highly powerful being.

 

[Xvartslayer]

They are gods because the setting says that they are gods. This is not a flippant answer. You have to be willing to accept a work of fiction on its on terms. In Star Wars, the Force exists for real. In the Dresden Files there are gods and Gods and people who might as well be gods. In "End of Days" you can kill Satan with a rocket launcher or something like that.

"What makes them moral?" By what standard? Post-Enlightenment Developed World standard? Why?

 

[Scribe]

I think its honestly a question of is it moral to eat meat. The cow does not tell us it does not want to be eaten, and we know that the Gods of FR require worship to exist. As part of that symbiotic relationship, they provide power, safety, and a destination for the afterlife.

These things are real in the Realms, thats the difference between this fictional world, and ours. They are demonstrably real.

The alternative is to have no gods, to have no after life, and then just like we have in the real world, questions of 'whats the point of this again?'

 

[Saidoro]

[MENTION=6803305]Xvartslayer[/MENTION] I don't think you're being flippant, but you haven't actually answered the question. I'm not asking "on whose authority are they gods," I'm asking "what does the state of godhood imply about the person in that state." When you look at a god whose powerful wizard status is undefined and a powerful wizard who is not a god, what is the difference between those two? I'm willing to accept at its face value that in this setting the word god points to the specific concept the authors want it to, but what I want to know is what that concept actually is.

And sure, Post-Enlightenment Developed World standards are fine. Those are the ones the players have, after all, and they're the ones the characters are likely to be actually evaluating decisions based on, no matter what the players think they are doing.