Greyhawk being dumped as the core setting in 3.5
- Thread starter DDK
- Start date
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: My Trolly Sense is tingling...
"Fahrlanghn, God of Roads", Table 3-7, PHB 31
"for he is the god of travels, roads, distance, and horizons" PHB 91
His concept is, sensibly, the God of Travellers, and clearly he would be the patron god of travellers. I know it's a minor nitpick, but I'd just really like to see "God of Travellers" written in print, rather than "God of Roads". God of Roads, as I said, makes it sound like the roads themselves are of such significance that they need a patron deity. I mean, it makes about as much sense as a "God of Buildings" or "God of Castles". I could see maybe a bricklayers' patron god, along the lines of the "metalworkers' god" archetype, but a god of a man-made product sounds silly. And the text written in the PHB indicates that, when it would've been much more sensible to say "God of Travellers".
I'd raise an eyebrow at a few of those names (Zilchus?) no matter the context, but the inconsistency's probably the biggest individual issue.
We disagree to a point on the ridiculousness of the names, but I largely agree with what you're saying here. I'm glad they didn't try to include more than a sample of deities in the PHB. I can see how people might get some use out of it, but I think a different plan would have served better. For all that was wrong with 2e (and I'm no 2e advocate, for the record), I don't remember any complaints about the lack of a sample pantheon in the PHB. People who didn't want it didn't bother with it, and there were Legends and Lore, Monster Mythology, the world-specific deity books, and the Complete Priest's Handbook for those who did. I wouldn't have complained about a similar approach for 3e (although, with books being $30 these days, I would hope that it wouldn't be necessary to purchase three of them like that).
Then again, the little "this is the humanoids' patron deity, this is what spells it grants" blurbs in the 3e Monster Manual are helpful. Monsters can have gods with weird-sounding names. They're monsters, after all. Besides, if the players laugh at them, the monsters can get angry and do the "Heathens! You dare to scoff at the name of the mighty (God's name here)!? DIE!!" routine.
Well, part of the problem is that they don't always age well, or sound good to English speakers. And the other part of the problem is that I'm pretty impossible to please in this regard.
WizarDru said:
"Fahrlanghn, God of Roads", Table 3-7, PHB 31
"for he is the god of travels, roads, distance, and horizons" PHB 91
His concept is, sensibly, the God of Travellers, and clearly he would be the patron god of travellers. I know it's a minor nitpick, but I'd just really like to see "God of Travellers" written in print, rather than "God of Roads". God of Roads, as I said, makes it sound like the roads themselves are of such significance that they need a patron deity. I mean, it makes about as much sense as a "God of Buildings" or "God of Castles". I could see maybe a bricklayers' patron god, along the lines of the "metalworkers' god" archetype, but a god of a man-made product sounds silly. And the text written in the PHB indicates that, when it would've been much more sensible to say "God of Travellers".
I'd raise an eyebrow at a few of those names (Zilchus?) no matter the context, but the inconsistency's probably the biggest individual issue.
We disagree to a point on the ridiculousness of the names, but I largely agree with what you're saying here. I'm glad they didn't try to include more than a sample of deities in the PHB. I can see how people might get some use out of it, but I think a different plan would have served better. For all that was wrong with 2e (and I'm no 2e advocate, for the record), I don't remember any complaints about the lack of a sample pantheon in the PHB. People who didn't want it didn't bother with it, and there were Legends and Lore, Monster Mythology, the world-specific deity books, and the Complete Priest's Handbook for those who did. I wouldn't have complained about a similar approach for 3e (although, with books being $30 these days, I would hope that it wouldn't be necessary to purchase three of them like that).
Then again, the little "this is the humanoids' patron deity, this is what spells it grants" blurbs in the 3e Monster Manual are helpful. Monsters can have gods with weird-sounding names. They're monsters, after all. Besides, if the players laugh at them, the monsters can get angry and do the "Heathens! You dare to scoff at the name of the mighty (God's name here)!? DIE!!" routine.
On the other hand, you point to real-world pantheons...you know, ones that people ACTUALLY WORSHIPPED, and find them wanting. Can't help you much, there.
Well, part of the problem is that they don't always age well, or sound good to English speakers. And the other part of the problem is that I'm pretty impossible to please in this regard.
Celestian is the god of Travellers as well - the god of celestial travel.
I think a third god handles sea travel...
The trouble is that the deities are presented out of context; but if you changed them too much, they'd then confuse people being introduced to Greyhawk.
Cheers!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: My Trolly Sense is tingling...
) in history has been about the control of trade. The Silk Road, the Spice Trade, the Tea Party... heck, the Spanish Main was BUILT on trade. America was discovered because Columbus wanted to find an easier, quicker route to the Asian continent for purposes of trade and to his death he thought he had found the eastern shores of Asia.
Therefore, a god of roads in a society that hasn't delved above renaissance technology levels in ten thousand years would (unlike western society which saw only one drop in technology level, the dark ages, but always saw a steady increase, even in roman times technology was always getting more advanced) place a pretty damn hefty importance on a god of roads
Then of course there's the fact that he's an Oeridian god and the Aerdi, the dominant Oeridian tribe who built the Great Kingdom which spanned two thirds of the Flanaess, were heavily dependant on travel and trade and thus built a magical roadway, the dirawaen, that repaired itself.
Personally, I've always thought he was cool as have most of the players I've ever spoken to or played with in 3rd ed. He also has the best domains, Luck and Travel
Well, actually, in a medieval, feudilistic society, trade is exceptionally important. In fact, pretty much every major advance and war (if you believe for a second that the Crusades were about religion then... well... that's another matter entirely and one not to be gotten into hereJesse Day said:
) in history has been about the control of trade. The Silk Road, the Spice Trade, the Tea Party... heck, the Spanish Main was BUILT on trade. America was discovered because Columbus wanted to find an easier, quicker route to the Asian continent for purposes of trade and to his death he thought he had found the eastern shores of Asia.Therefore, a god of roads in a society that hasn't delved above renaissance technology levels in ten thousand years would (unlike western society which saw only one drop in technology level, the dark ages, but always saw a steady increase, even in roman times technology was always getting more advanced) place a pretty damn hefty importance on a god of roads
Then of course there's the fact that he's an Oeridian god and the Aerdi, the dominant Oeridian tribe who built the Great Kingdom which spanned two thirds of the Flanaess, were heavily dependant on travel and trade and thus built a magical roadway, the dirawaen, that repaired itself.
Personally, I've always thought he was cool as have most of the players I've ever spoken to or played with in 3rd ed. He also has the best domains, Luck and Travel
I think the names lend a lot of authenticity to the setting. If you look through enough history, you'll find it's replete with numerous 'silly' names or names that make little sense, rhyme or reason. Such is what you get when there is a dynamic mix and interaction of peoples through war, trade, intermarriage, religious practices, etc.Jesse Day said:
Nathal
Explorer
DDK said:
Philosophical Hinduism is pantheistic but there is also a strong polytheistic 'folk' tradition. Also there are many different spiritual paths within Hinduism. For example, the path of devotion (Bhakti I think) is henotheistic, meaning the preference for one god out of an acknowledged many. That idea of henotheism bears some similarity with the Clerics of D&D in a polytheistic world. Buddhism is certainly a religion, admittedly not theistic in the Theravada tradition, although highly mystical dealing as it does with "direct experience of reality" in Nirvana, which means (literally translated) "extinguishment" of the earth-clinging ego but NOT extinguishment in the sense of death. Pure Land Buddhism, however, does involve the worship of Amitabha ("Boundless Light," also known as Amitayus, or "Boundless Life") who presides over a Buddha-realm known as Sukhavati, a realm of rebirth in which all impediments to the attainment of final Enlightenment are nonexistent.
[/B][/QUOTE]
Last edited:
First, I forgot to say this last time:
That was Sixchan, not me. And as for the pronunciation...
"Wee Jas (wee jass), goddess of death and magic, etc..." PHB 92.
But if it was pronounced "Wee Jaahs" it wouldn't be quite as bad. I wish your pronunciation were the correct one.
Next, on Fharlanghn:
The "magical roadway" thing makes it little more sensible. I still think he would have been better off as just a "God of Travel" (and as for the trade issue, then he should also have a role as the God of Trade if there isn't already one), but I guess I can kinda see why he's the God of Roads and it makes sense now.
Still, for the sake of the average non-Greyhawk player who picks up the PHB, it would probably be just as well that he were listed as the God of Travellers (and possibly Trade). Not everyone can benefit from your high ranks in Knowledge: Greyhawk as readily as we can.
Definitely. He and Olidammara have the domains that appeal to me the most... though really even Trickery isn't quite as good as Travel, so yes, I agree about the domains.
That was Sixchan, not me. And as for the pronunciation...
"Wee Jas (wee jass), goddess of death and magic, etc..." PHB 92.
But if it was pronounced "Wee Jaahs" it wouldn't be quite as bad. I wish your pronunciation were the correct one.
Next, on Fharlanghn:
The "magical roadway" thing makes it little more sensible. I still think he would have been better off as just a "God of Travel" (and as for the trade issue, then he should also have a role as the God of Trade if there isn't already one), but I guess I can kinda see why he's the God of Roads and it makes sense now.
Still, for the sake of the average non-Greyhawk player who picks up the PHB, it would probably be just as well that he were listed as the God of Travellers (and possibly Trade). Not everyone can benefit from your high ranks in Knowledge: Greyhawk as readily as we can.
Definitely. He and Olidammara have the domains that appeal to me the most... though really even Trickery isn't quite as good as Travel, so yes, I agree about the domains.
Considering that the Qu'ran accepts both the Old Testament and the New Testament as being valid, if inferior and incomplete, versions of the Word of God, yes, you can in fact lump it together with Judaism and Christianity.
Al'Akbar simply means "The Great" and has been used as an honorific for mere mortals.
And the phrase is "Allahu Akbar" which means "God is Great."
Tarek
I like to have some awful sounding gods in my game. To have all the gods with cool sounding names just seems too fake and unnatural to me. Just like if every person had a name like Max Power, or Trent Steel.
In fact having a good name when everybody else in the world had one would make having a cool name meaningless.
In fact having a good name when everybody else in the world had one would make having a cool name meaningless.
Celebrim
Legend
I couldn't more disagree. In fact, Fahrlanghn is one of my favorite invented diety period because it is so extraordinarily fitting that there be a God of Roads. In fact, one could quite easily form a sufficient cosmological triad from a God(dess) of Roads, a God(dess) of Doors, and a God(dess) of the Hearth - all of which are arguably 'created' things. But are not deities often creators? Who created the idea of a road, or of a door, or of the hearth? In a very very very real since, Fahrlanghn's role as the God of Roads is far more powerful and influential than his role as the protector of those that travel (upon roads). Imagine Fahrlanghn as the creator of the _idea_ of roads and all they metaphorically stand for - change and the facility of change, journey and the desire to reach a goal, distance and separation between objects, ideas, and people, all processes and all things that are not themselves delimiters but enablers especially of creating closeness or distance. That is a far more important station than the God of Travellers and a far more intellectually satisfying one.
To be frank, I think the idea is a far more intellectually satisfying for a deity than 90% of the pantheonic dieties that man at one time worshiped and discarded upon finding monotheistic and more abstract deities to be more satisfying ideas worthy of worship. Zeus and his like died without much of a fight. And a 'God of Roads' is a far more interesting and believable area of worship than a 'God of Rangers' or a 'God of Paladins' or some other equally narrow RPG centric idea.
And no, I don't expect the average person reading the text to read 'God of Roads' and go 'Wow, what a cool concept' but I am glad that Gygax never (whatever his other faults) wrote down to his audience and treated them as if they were stupid and couldn't be expected to do some deep thinking about the matter at hand.
Similar Threads
