Why would gods compete with each other over worshippers when they have so many differences in areas of interest etc.?
? re Polytheistic Worlds
- Thread starter mythusmage
- Start date
MonsterMash
First Post
Initial thoughts. Much more to follow.mythusmage said:
The easiest explanation is the one from Terry Pratchett's Small Gods, their power is in proportion to the number of worshippers that they have, whether in terms of temporal power (200,000 worshippers trump 200 and could field a reasonable size army) or divine power (possibly expressed as a divine rank - with the gods ability to grant spells, etc being based on this).
They can't share? It has to be one god per worshipper? What if one's god doesn't handle something? Is one then poop sans fortune?
jdrakeh
Front Range Warlock
mythusmage said:
Well, if one assumes the old 'power of gods flows from mortal belief in them' paradigm, then the answer is obvious - power. The more people that believe in a given god, the more powerful they are, thus the longer they will exist. In short, warring for followers is a kind of self-preservation tactic. This makes a lot of sense in most D&D settings.
Then you have simple self-righteousness, which is the other primary motivation for this behavior in D&D settings. Gods view it as their duty to protect a certain race/class/culture of people, and thus war with other gods who would seek to subvert or harm this same said group of people.
D&D gods are much more 'human' than the gods of various pantheons drawn from our own history, whose exact relationship with mortals remains largely undefined. In D&D, the relationship between gods and their mortal followers is typically well defined in theory, if not actual mechanics.
In Roman, Greek, and Norse mythology gods were usually more concerned with petty arguments amongst themselves than with expanding or caring for their collective mortal flocks. Sure, they might have had their favorite individual mortals, but they commonly utilized mortals like many roleplayers utilize minis.
Gothic_Demon
First Post
I like the idea put forward by Pratchett (and MonsterMash) that a god requires worshippers to still be a god.
To elaborate, I split the 'worship' of gods into two categories: tributer and follower. A tributer is the lip-service kind of worshipper. They pay a tribute to the clerics of a certain god based upon need and the god's portfolio, but they don't truly worship the god fully. This is a bit like a sweety to a god, it's a nice little thing but it's not gonna stop you going hungry.
Followers pray to their god all the time. They believe in their god above and beyond the little things their god (via clerics) does for them. These people create a constant flow of worshipping energy (as opposed to the drop of energy from a tribute), and this flow allows the god more strength.
Thus, whilst an individual might make offerings to many gods, they can't be a true follower of more than one.
To elaborate, I split the 'worship' of gods into two categories: tributer and follower. A tributer is the lip-service kind of worshipper. They pay a tribute to the clerics of a certain god based upon need and the god's portfolio, but they don't truly worship the god fully. This is a bit like a sweety to a god, it's a nice little thing but it's not gonna stop you going hungry.
Followers pray to their god all the time. They believe in their god above and beyond the little things their god (via clerics) does for them. These people create a constant flow of worshipping energy (as opposed to the drop of energy from a tribute), and this flow allows the god more strength.
Thus, whilst an individual might make offerings to many gods, they can't be a true follower of more than one.
Gothic_Demon said:
Why not? You worship one for this and another for that, paying homage to each as needed. To each according to desire, from each according to domain.
Yair
Community Supporter
Who says they would?mythusmage said:
FR makes it clear most worshippers pay homage to a multitdue of gods, not just their patron deity.
A cleric of, say, Wee Jas won't be censored for offering a prayer to Fharlanghan when embarking on a new journey in my game. Each god has its protfolios, even a character that deovotes his life to the service of a certain deity shouldn't ignore that.
Gods compete over worshippers when they share the same portfolios, or when their protfolios are in conflict. If that Wee Jas cleric would start saying prayers to Fharlanghan to speed the way of the dead to their afterlife, Wee Jas might be a bit pissed. And if a cleric of Nerull would come along and clame life and unlife as Nerull's domain, he is in for some opposition.
Even then no god actually competes over worshippers in my campaigns. They tend to look after their portfolios, not their faithful. The faithful are only useful and supported to the extent they further the portfolio and interests of the deity.
A god of murder wants more murder to be done. Cults and secretive organizations are useful to further that, so he grants spells and guidance to clerics and set such up. He only "competes for worship" when and if his worship-based plans to further his agenda are stopped by the worship of another deity.
Gothic_Demon
First Post
Gothic_Demon said:
mythusmage said:
Paying homage is the equivalent of a single tithe, or one prayer at the right moment (which needs a tithe to work, right
). A farmer who prays nightly to the god of agriculture to help look after his crops, whether he has any planted or not, worships fully the god of agriculture. A farmer who prays to the god of roads on market day does not fully worship the god of roads. Paying homage for an individual event or favour is different to having a solid working relationship, if you can put it that way.
Thia Halmades
First Post
I'll take this thread in another direction, that may (or may not) shed some light on the topic. Bearing in mind the concept of a Polytheistic Mythos is, like most religions, a backdrop for our own morality plays (see: Greece/Rome, Egypt) we can look through a couple of different lenses.
For one, the idea of 'competing Gods' can be a campaign structure in itself. Gods may be attempting to knock off other deities to consume/assume their portfolios or because they flat out don't get along, for whatever reason. See: FR: God Wars, also, Egypt: Set vs. Osiris, Greece: Hades vs. Zeus, Norse: Loki vs. Thor. In a campaign structure, these two sets of followers could be 'acting out' the battle being waged in the heavens, hence they are in direct competition, from sabotage, to who does more for the community, to all out war, despite having differet portfolios. In the case of Loki vs. Thor, the two have almost nothing in common; Loki is portrayed as either CN or CE, and Thor is classically CG (God of Thunder and all that, likes the ladies, but is still on the side of 'good.' Bit of a partier to be considered LG). So now we have (and can have, in multiple ways) situations where they compete despite the idea of portfolio.
Let's pull it back a bit, and the Gods themselves are, as was posted earlier, merely the Incarna of other people's beliefs. Then you'll have a group of people constantly attempting to convert/alter the faiths of others to your new faith (See: OOTS, Banjo the Clown). "Cthulu for President! Why choose a lesser evil?" In this scenario, the Gods are real, but real because they were made 'real' by their followers. This gets into ideas like collective subconcious that I won't go into for this thread, suffice to say, the more people pray, for whatever reason, the more powerful the God becomes, always questing to no longer need followers (i.e., to become a Real Boy, instead of a powerful idea). That would make one helluva campaign, now that I think about. I should write that one down. Moving on.
And, of course, the idea that the Gods aren't directly involved in the way we think of them. Competition is nothing more than folk tales and stories; there's no hard evidence that they exist. Yes, Clerics cast spells, and THEY claim there are Gods, but what does that mean to the local Wizards Union? Not much. Sure, they have a Priest of Azuth, but hey; who doesn't? Now it truly doesn't matter who your patron deity is, because the belief that they grant spells is what's getting your Clerics their magic; not the Deity themselves.
Good morning!
For one, the idea of 'competing Gods' can be a campaign structure in itself. Gods may be attempting to knock off other deities to consume/assume their portfolios or because they flat out don't get along, for whatever reason. See: FR: God Wars, also, Egypt: Set vs. Osiris, Greece: Hades vs. Zeus, Norse: Loki vs. Thor. In a campaign structure, these two sets of followers could be 'acting out' the battle being waged in the heavens, hence they are in direct competition, from sabotage, to who does more for the community, to all out war, despite having differet portfolios. In the case of Loki vs. Thor, the two have almost nothing in common; Loki is portrayed as either CN or CE, and Thor is classically CG (God of Thunder and all that, likes the ladies, but is still on the side of 'good.' Bit of a partier to be considered LG). So now we have (and can have, in multiple ways) situations where they compete despite the idea of portfolio.
Let's pull it back a bit, and the Gods themselves are, as was posted earlier, merely the Incarna of other people's beliefs. Then you'll have a group of people constantly attempting to convert/alter the faiths of others to your new faith (See: OOTS, Banjo the Clown). "Cthulu for President! Why choose a lesser evil?" In this scenario, the Gods are real, but real because they were made 'real' by their followers. This gets into ideas like collective subconcious that I won't go into for this thread, suffice to say, the more people pray, for whatever reason, the more powerful the God becomes, always questing to no longer need followers (i.e., to become a Real Boy, instead of a powerful idea). That would make one helluva campaign, now that I think about. I should write that one down. Moving on.
And, of course, the idea that the Gods aren't directly involved in the way we think of them. Competition is nothing more than folk tales and stories; there's no hard evidence that they exist. Yes, Clerics cast spells, and THEY claim there are Gods, but what does that mean to the local Wizards Union? Not much. Sure, they have a Priest of Azuth, but hey; who doesn't? Now it truly doesn't matter who your patron deity is, because the belief that they grant spells is what's getting your Clerics their magic; not the Deity themselves.
Good morning!
MonsterMash
First Post
In a polytheistic mythos like the Greek/Roman one, more worshippers would tend to equal more bragging rights among the other gods (a strong justification knowing how the Greek gods are often portrayed), rather than affecting their actual power.
Similar Threads
