(Proposal) Deities: Créan and Z'iu

[Rae ArdGaoth]

1) True, true, worshippers... My thoughts were this: I didn't want to say "None" because that would limit characters (or DMs or whoever) who decided to make these deities their patrons. I did, however, want to emphasize the fact that none are needed and that any worshippers they have are probably unique or at least extremely rare. So... I'm undecided right now, perhaps I'll clarify the text a bit more.

2) I don't really care, I've been saying it sort of... "CRAY-ahn" But CRAY-en is just as good. After all, in truth, these names are just labels, probably draconic for Destroyer or Creator. They aren't people risen to deific power, like most gods. They're the inherent forces of the universe, defying description and therefore nomenclature. ::grinn:: I like CRAY-ehn. It rolls a bit better. And maybe it would be easier for a dragon to say.

3) I did have them as "the elements" before. Then I deleted the domains. Also, Z'iu doesn't control earth. So perhaps "the elements (except earth)" would work.

Well, I thank jdvn1 very much for all his input! (Thanks, jdvn1, for all your input! ) It inspired me to rewrite the whole smeggin' thing. So now all I need are some judge comments (and approvals!).

 

[Jdvn1]

1) Well, typically people don't follow overdieties anyway. Their realm is to broad to cover just one faith (partially why they don't have domains). At least, that's my interpretation of of. I decided my character would worship Nature, by the way. I was looking for a Nature god and thought Crean was it, but I'll just stick with Nature.

2) Well, I was mentioning him to a friend before and she was like, "Crayon? Like the coloring pencil?" And I was like, "No no no... well, yes. Hm." So CRAY-ehn is my preference. He can be an inherent force of nature and defy all description, but if he has a silly name I respect him less. You want me to try to look up how to say 'creation' or 'creator' in Draconic? I have the Draconomicon and the Dragon magazine that go over the language, so maybe I can find something.

3) Oh, didn't notice that. Well, whichever you like. I guess it's not a big deal.

I'm not a judge, but I'd give it a thumbs-up. Well, assuming LEW is ready to accept some overdeities. Most settings don't go into that much detail about overdeities, but maybe it'd be a good source of plot hooks.

 

[El Jefe]

Creating a cosmology is no simple thing, but I think this is an interesting contribution to Living Enworld. I could nitpick it more and more, but I think you've got it to the point where it's worthy of consideration by the judges.

The next step (presuming this gets approved) would be to flesh out the rest of the pantheon's relationship, diety by diety, to Crean and Z'iu. Such things would be the Inner Mysteries taught to the higher clerics of the Living Enworld dieties, as well as possible plot hooks.

As an aside, this whole subject is somewhat close to making the positive material plane and the negative material plane both sentient entitites, or at least giving each of them an avatar on the prime material plane.

 

[Rae ArdGaoth]

jdvn1: About the names, I'd be much obliged if their names actually meant something. I decided on Crean because... well, "Creation" minus tio equals Crean, change the emphasis, and there you go. Z'iu I decided on because Z is the last letter in the alphabet, and if Crean is the be all, then Z'iu is the end all. A quick google search on "speak draconic" led me to a site with a small draconic lexicon, I guess right from Dragon Magazine #284. And all I found was "shadow" which is "sjach". I don't know if I like that so much, perhaps the names are just from a language even more ancient than draconic. I'm open to suggestions.

El jefe: Please, nitpick away! And you're right, they do sound like positive and negative planes. Except that Crean isn't good. I don't know that has anything to do with it. Maybe theri alignments are not quite correct? It's tough giving forces of nature alignments. And on top of that, the alignment system isn't quite perfect, I don't think. Anyway, what's your thought?

And thirdly, have any judges even looked at this?

 

[El Jefe]

I'd think that Crean and Z'iu would have opposite alignments of some sort. Moreover, I don't see why Crean necessarily has to be good, or that Z'iu has to be chaotic. Pushed hard enough, you could argue that Crean is Chaotic Neutral, since you never know what he's going to create next, and Z'iu is Lawful Neutral, since he relentlessly tries to destroy all things, both good and bad.

For that matter, you could even argue that they are both Lawful Neutral, since they always do the same thing and never move out of their groove. Or, if you really think creation is uniformly good and destruction is uniformly evil, call it Lawful Good and Lawful Evil.

I guess if anything is truly beyond alignment, it would be this pair.

 

[Knight Otu]

I'm not quite sure how I feel about getting overdeities into the mix... I certainly like the gods, but I want to hear from the other judges first.

 

[nimisgod]

I've looked over it several times.

But my concern mirrors Knight Otu's sentiments.

That said, I believe that making an Over-diety is a gigantic change in the scape of LEW. It may not directly affect mortals (PCs) but it does affect world philosophies, world physics and how reality itself works.

Thus, I think this proposal are not just of gods to worship and get spells from, but a general statement on the nature of the setting itself. If Crean is the beginning of all things and the creator, then we've defined the beginning of LEW as it is.

Does it affect LEW in a good or a bad way? Does it remove or enhance the setting's mystique? I don't see all the over-arcing implications of this proposal. So, I can't really throw my vote either way.

As El Jefe said, if C'rean and Z'iu get approved, then there is a ton of work to be done afterwards.

 

[Jdvn1]

Something else to think about is that these two aren't necessarily the only overdeities either. It's possible there are other, possibly more powerful, overdeities that factor into the picture. So these two might have a lot of influence, but it's also not a direct definition of the world philosophies, the world physics, and the nature of the setting itself. I think there's middle ground, here.

Does it affect LEW in a good or a bad way?

Maybe it's neutral. Does it have to be good or bad? This isn't the end-all-be-all of the pantheon.

Does it remove or enhance the setting's mystique?

Well, I'd say maybe it removes some mystique but also introduces possible plot hooks. But that happens whenever you detail any sort of deity. Maybe the overdeity information should be less than the rest of the pantheon, since no one should know anything about them or follows them. And that'll also increase the mystique.

That also means that the deities' relationship to other deities wouldn't be spelled out. People would be like, "Huh? I don't get Crean and Z'iu." And they'd be told, "Well, no one gets them. They're that powerful."

So I guess other options include:
1) Severely lessen the descriptions, get rid of their alignments and home planes, get rid of their relationship to the elements. Basically, make them vague overdeities that no one knows out. Their description would be mostly stuff like, "Crean tends to..." and "Z'iu favors..."
2) Cut down their breadth, make them more specific, and turn them into intermediate deities or something.

Rae: I came across the same problem with the vocabulary that you did. While the lists in the Draconomicon and the Dragon article are different, they're not overly useful. Maybe I'll look into other languages or something. Even if the vote becomes a hung jury, you could keep the gods around or put them in House Rules or something. I know I'll keep a copy of them around, at least for reference.

 

[Rae ArdGaoth]

In the FRCS, Ao is given two small paragraphs, no specific details (alignment, home plane, etc). From what I can tell, Ao is definitely an overdeity (heck, the text calls him "the overgod of Toril"). He is ultimately powerful and "stands outside of the power struggles of deities". He did banish all the deities to the material plane for the Godswar period, so he does assert his power. But other than that, he stays out things. I think this is possibly what you all are going for.

However, such a concept cripples these deities. As forces of destruction and creation, they MUST influence all things, all the time. I would say... well, I don't know. They wouldn't really work as intermediate deities, their domains of power are too great. Greater deities are what I had them set at in the beginning. Jdvn1's suggestion of narrowing their range of power is a good possibility. But like nimisgod says, such powerful gods who are actually part of a worship-able pantheon might upset the balance of power.

Personally, I like the idea of creation vs. destruction battling for domination, neither winning. Which is why I proposed these deities in the first place. I don't think that introducing them will upset the mystery of the game... One scenario I can think of where it might "elucidate mystery" is the question "Who created the world?" But! Just because Crean creates all things doesn't necesarily mean he created the world. Well, of course, indirectly he did, but I mean to say that one of Crean's lesser creations created the world. Possibly some god not currently in the pantheon or currently off on another world/plane/multiverse creating other worlds. See?

Perhaps Crean's creators should be more emphasized in his description. And perhaps, as a compromise of sorts, the elements could be taken out, leaving them (more) open to specific patron deities, if you catch my drift.

How does that sound?

 

[Knight Otu]

Stickied for discussion and votes.

I think we may want multiple creation myths (which may or may not be conflicting). I have one for the kobolds that I've been meaning to post for some time, and propably will soon.