Post Roman D&D setting with magic and Roman Gods

[Thomas Bowman]

Because that is the labels that are most recognizable to readers here, also they are referred to as Norse gods in Deities and Demigods. Too bad they never published a Deities and Demigods book for 4th and 5th edition D&D, they prefer to use Forgotten Realms or Grayhawk or Krynn deities, but I like the ones from our legends better, they have tales associated with them that weren't written by modern authors, I enjoyed reading the Odyssey for example. The gods from our history have real depth to them, they have relationships, and they aren't just the god of this or the god of that. Real human beings one time worshipped these gods, which makes them excellent subjects for a homebrew campaign world, instead of having to make up a god from scratch, you just pull one out of the Deities and Demigods book and use that. Its fun to stat them out too. There is a tendency for modern writers to make gods omnipotent and all powerful, because they are heavily influenced by the major faiths of our world today. But pagan gods are more fun to play around with in role playing games.

By the way, are you saying that the Germans wouldn't want to form their own kingdom? Christianity didn't create Germany after all, and considering their history in World War II, it didn't tend to influence them all that much anyway.

 

[Anselyn]

Christianity didn't create Germany after all, and considering their history in World War II, it didn't tend to influence them all that much anyway.

That's an interesting combination of ill-informed and offensive. You might want to take a look at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years'_War

 

[Thomas Bowman]

That's an interesting combination of ill-informed and offensive. You might want to take a look at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years'_War

Yes it was, people were murdering each other in the name of Christ! That seems to indicate that they weren't good Christians. the Christian philosophy was to turn the other cheek and to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Christianity is supposed to be a religion of peace, and when people fight wars over a religion of peace, something is very wrong here. I wish the Germans remembered their Christianity during World War II, and if they did, there wouldn't have been one.

 

[Shasarak]

Without the Pope to crown Charlemagne Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire (and in fact without Christianity as a reason to continue the conceit of the Roman Empire to stay off the Apocalypse predicted in Nebuchadnezzar's dream), you don't have any Germanic Empire, even a notional one.

I always thought that Charlemagne got tricked into becoming Emperor.

 

[Thomas Bowman]

The truth is, Europeans were Europeans whether they were Christian or Pagan, they fought and built empires regardless of what they believed in. Peasants at the time found Christianity more personally satisfying than the pagan religions, and the warlords had to give a nod to that, so they became Christian too, but they still behaved the same old way. Christianity didn't change them, it just provided some additional rational to conquer an empire, but I'm sure they would have found a reason to build a German Empire absent that, people like power after all.

 

[Anselyn]

Yes it was, people were murdering each other in the name of Christ!

My point was that Christianity certainly did play an important role in the creation of Germany. It also affected the emergence of pan-Germanism.

To wish that the Germans had remembered their Christiamity in WW11 seems a needlessly specific case to make and suggests that WWII is in some way different from other wars. I think that conventional thinking ascribes the roots of WWII to be the peace treaty enforced by the (Christian) victors at the end of WW1.

Did the US forget its Christianity in Vietnam and Iraq? Or is that somehow different? I am writing as an atheist Brit but I feel uncomfortable about your broad brush tarring of Christian Germans.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

I will judiciously avoid references to the role of Christianity in WWII and would recommend that others do likewise; this thread will have a very short life, otherwise.

The reason that I asked where the “separation” date between our own history and this parallel history lies, is that – after, say 30 CE as you suggest – it becomes increasingly difficult to justify subsequent structures (e.g. the Eastern Roman Empire) which are predicated on complex systems which include religion. The further removed in time a system is from this initial bifurcation point, the more implausible it becomes that a “parallel” system which resembles it comes to evolve. And the length of time involved – you are suggesting almost 1500 years – would, I submit, be long enough to change the shape of the world completely beyond recognition.

Monotheism – when employed in the service of an imperial philosophy – is a very effective tool for consolidating power and homogenizing culture; it is uniquely suited to creating an “us” (those who believe and practice as we do) and “them” (those whose religious practices differ) justification for war and conquest. Where polytheism prevails and absolute truth claims do not hold this kind of weight, different mechanisms also tend to drive the justification – bear in mind that whatever the justification, resource control and population pressure are invariably the actual motivators for war.

To suggest that an entity (say Britannia) retains its cultural and linguistic identity after such a time is unlikely, given what we know of human migrations, invasions and annexations. To say that many or all former Roman provinces have retained their identities is highly implausible; you are describing small polities that have effectively remained static in their culture and borders for over 1000 years. This simply doesn’t happen.

 

[Thomas Bowman]

My point was that Christianity certainly did play an important role in the creation of Germany. It also affected the emergence of pan-Germanism.

To wish that the Germans had remembered their Christiamity in WW11 seems a needlessly specific case to make and suggests that WWII is in some way different from other wars. I think that conventional thinking ascribes the roots of WWII to be the peace treaty enforced by the (Christian) victors at the end of WW1.

Did the US forget its Christianity in Vietnam and Iraq? Or is that somehow different? I am writing as an atheist Brit but I feel uncomfortable about your broad brush tarring of Christian Germans.

There is no comparison between the Vietnam War and World War II, nor is there one between the Iraq War and World War II. World War II is in a league all of its own.

 

[Eltab]

I always thought that Charlemagne got tricked into becoming Emperor.

Charlemagne was expecting some sort of Papal acknowledgement for what he had already accomplished: beat up everybody who was a threat to (newly-emerged) France.
Charlemagne did NOT expect the Pope to show up with a crown, figurative or literal; nor to be addressed as "Emperor".

 

[Eltab]

Christianity didn't create Germany after all, and considering their history in World War II, it didn't tend to influence them all that much anyway.

Please review your previous threads, and consider how 'stepping on your own tongue' contributes to the discussions in them being derailed.