• NOW LIVE! -- One-Page Adventures for D&D 5th Edition on Kickstarter! A booklet of colourful one-page adventures for D&D 5th Edition ranging from levels 1-9 and designed for a single session of play.
log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D General [Dragonlance/Faerun] Anyone here met any Cataclysm/Wall of the Faithless defenders?


log in or register to remove this ad

But it is not only the divine spellcasters, but also supernatural menaces as the undeads, vampires, ghouls and company. We are talking about people who didn't studied in an university, and they don't know they will be still alive the next year. When you are praying because your children are very sick your hope in a fantasy world isn't in the science. The peasants can't see the gods, but neither to see the kings and noble houses with their own eyes to know they are real.
 

TheSword

Legend
Supporter
Why should those tiny minority of people be punished, though? That’s the salient question.

There are real life equivalents, but we can’t go into them here.

It’s not unreasonable at all, in such a world, for some sentients to view all the gods as evil.
The Gods of the FR are far more like the Norse or Greek Pantheon. Fallible, emotional and all too human. I’m sure they consider a mere human claiming to deny their very existence something deserving of punishment.

The Wall of the Faithless is a punishment for those who deny the gods or are false in the name. Why, in a world with real gods would you think their wouldn’t be a punishment for this? It’s not about fairness or justice, it’s about those in power protecting their hegemony. Not to mention the fact as Ed G says, not believing in the gods in the FR is clearly idiocy.

In short, to answer the OP, yes there are lots of people who have no problem defending the Wall of the Faithless!

As to the Cataclysm... never heard of it... what’s a Dragonlance? 🤪
 


doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
The Gods of the FR are far more like the Norse or Greek Pantheon. Fallible, emotional and all too human. I’m sure they consider a mere human claiming to deny their very existence something deserving of punishment.

The Wall of the Faithless is a punishment for those who deny the gods or are false in the name. Why, in a world with real gods would you think their wouldn’t be a punishment for this? It’s not about fairness or justice, it’s about those in power protecting their hegemony. Not to mention the fact as Ed G says, not believing in the gods in the FR is clearly idiocy.

In short, to answer the OP, yes there are lots of people who have no problem defending the Wall of the Faithless!

As to the Cataclysm... never heard of it... what’s a Dragonlance? 🤪
As someone who worships the Norse gods, I genuinely don’t think they care about the people who think they don’t exist. 🤷‍♂️
 

AdmundfortGeographer

Getting lost in fantasy maps
IMO, the Cataclysm makes more sense when one goes back to the original concept--the Kingpriest tried to magically summon a god to purge evil from Krynn, and the Cataclysm was the natural consequences of such an act. (You have to dig into Hickman's notes and hints in the oldest game material to find this.)
I like this the most. But I want to have it fit the simultaneous Cataclysm visited upon Taladas.
 

Hussar

Legend
I always wonder why folks have an issue with the Cataclysm. This is pretty much straight up Bible stories being brought into D&D, same as Goldmoon and the Disks of Mishakal. This is the Flood story told from a fantasy POV. Mankind gets too big for its britches, the higher power slaps them down, killing lots and lots of them in the process, things start over.

This is hardly a new story.
 

AdmundfortGeographer

Getting lost in fantasy maps
I always wonder why folks have an issue with the Cataclysm. This is pretty much straight up Bible stories being brought into D&D, same as Goldmoon and the Disks of Mishakal. This is the Flood story told from a fantasy POV. Mankind gets too big for its britches, the higher power slaps them down, killing lots and lots of them in the process, things start over.

This is hardly a new story.
There is a different level of acceptance when one is a very not-literal story (I understand some out there are biblical literalists), and the other is the literal history which your characters are experiencing the aftereffects of.

I‘d be squinting side eye at the player who sat down at a Dragonlance table saying they the player (not character) was repudiating the Cataclysm as not literal history of the setting.
 

The Wall of the Faithless is a punishment for those who deny the gods or are false in the name. Why, in a world with real gods would you think their wouldn’t be a punishment for this? It’s not about fairness or justice, it’s about those in power protecting their hegemony. Not to mention the fact as Ed G says, not believing in the gods in the FR is clearly idiocy.
Its a con racket to protect beings who shouldn't be there. Break down the wall, kill the gods, shatter their thrones.

NWN2, MotB used it as its big evil point and lemme tell you, it was perfect for it

I always wonder why folks have an issue with the Cataclysm. This is pretty much straight up Bible stories being brought into D&D, same as Goldmoon and the Disks of Mishakal. This is the Flood story told from a fantasy POV. Mankind gets too big for its britches, the higher power slaps them down, killing lots and lots of them in the process, things start over.
The problem with the Cataclysm is moreso stuff around it. than the event itself. Big ol' meteor raining down death and destruction with such force the gods are uncontactable? That's the good stuff!

The instigator of this being word of the author "Good", alleged 'good' gods killing millions and withdrawing assistance, and then getting uppity when people rightfully say 'yo wtf'? Yeah, that's not 'Good' and ties into why Dragonlance handles alignments poorly
 

M.L. Martin

Adventurer
I always wonder why folks have an issue with the Cataclysm. This is pretty much straight up Bible stories being brought into D&D, same as Goldmoon and the Disks of Mishakal. This is the Flood story told from a fantasy POV. Mankind gets too big for its britches, the higher power slaps them down, killing lots and lots of them in the process, things start over.

This is hardly a new story.
The Cataclysm bugs me in some of the material surrounding it: the Kingpriest of Istar was supposedly a good man, the corruption wasn't dramatic enough to merit such extreme measures (compare it to the depiction of Numenor in the Akallabeth, one of the likely inspirations), and the 'gods' sulk for three centuries before reaching back out to humanity.
 


Its a con racket to protect beings who shouldn't be there. Break down the wall, kill the gods, shatter their thrones.

NWN2, MotB used it as its big evil point and lemme tell you, it was perfect for it


The problem with the Cataclysm is moreso stuff around it. than the event itself. Big ol' meteor raining down death and destruction with such force the gods are uncontactable? That's the good stuff!

The instigator of this being word of the author "Good", alleged 'good' gods killing millions and withdrawing assistance, and then getting uppity when people rightfully say 'yo wtf'? Yeah, that's not 'Good' and ties into why Dragonlance handles alignments poorly
It wasn't the Good gods. It was the entire pantheon that approved it.

The Good gods acquiesced under protest, and after sending several warnings and signs and also tried to stop it via Lord Soth (but he turned his back on them to murder his wife out of jealousy.)

Even then the Good gods took the truly Good souls to heaven.

It was perfectly in line with Evil gods and also the Neutral ones (things had gotten out of balance).
 
Last edited:

In neither of those cases, would they be found False.

False is for the hypocrites, for those who profess one faith, while living in contravention of it.

Someone who renounced their faith in a specific deity before death, but before formally committing to a new deity, would be treated the same as one who had never formally committed to any deity. . .that their soul would be up for grabs by deities of their alignment or with a portfolio similar to their profession or interests.

A random follower of Cyric, who repented, gave up faith in Cyric, atoned, and changed alignment, but never formally converted to a different religion, might well be claimed by a good-aligned deity that was an enemy of Cyric. . .Mystra, Tyr and Torm come to mind.

A Paladin of Torm that renounces violence and the faith of Torm, and does not purport to be a follower of Torm while being a pacifist, wouldn't be False, they aren't being hypocritical. Even if they never adopted another faith, it's pretty clear from alignment and philosophy that Ilmater would accept them in the afterlife.

A Paladin of Torm that publicly still held himself out to be a Paladin, carried the Holy Symbol, prayed for spells, functioned in the Church all as a Paladin, while being an avowed pacifist, THAT would be false. A follower of Cyric that thinks that Cyric is a fool and is secretly a reasonably good man, but wants the power that comes from being in Cyric's cult, or fears retribution if he leaves so he still worships Cyric despite not following Cyric's doctrine, that person is in danger of being found False.

What about a Good aligned follower of Bane who seeks to reform the church into a kinder entity?

Tortured for eternity for being False to his God.

I guess Ao is outside of morality concerns (valuing neither Good over Evil or vice versa) and Kelemvor is LN and just there to follow the rules, but still.
 



Orius

Adventurer
I always wonder why folks have an issue with the Cataclysm. This is pretty much straight up Bible stories being brought into D&D, same as Goldmoon and the Disks of Mishakal. This is the Flood story told from a fantasy POV. Mankind gets too big for its britches, the higher power slaps them down, killing lots and lots of them in the process, things start over.

This is hardly a new story.

Exactly. It's Mormon theology butting heads with D&D alignment. Throw in a rapture and Pride as a deadly sin, and you've got the background of Dragonlance. That's why it feels clunky.
 


Did you somehow think that something intended to be a punishment was going to be a pleasant experience?

It's not intended to be punishment.

That would be getting sent to the Barrens of Doom and Despair or the Supreme Throne or worse places for eternity for being 'faithful' to Bane or Cyric. I cant image being faithful to Bhaal, Malar, Myrkul, Talos, Set, Shar or similar nets you a great eternity either.

The atheists get non-existence as a final reward. That's gotta be preferable to an eternity in Hell.

Heck, I'd probably take non-existence over an eternity of a lot of the Neutral or even Good afterlives.
 
Last edited:

Iry

Hero
You have to put all those faithless people somewhere, and a wall is a pretty efficient and functional shape. You don't want them wandering around aimlessly like those Asphodel folks. Sure, you could just annihilate them utterly, but what if you need an army of souls later? Waste not, want not. :geek:
 


An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top